第1章

byThomasHenryHuxleyIncontroversy，asincourtship，thegoodoldruletobeoffwiththeoldbeforeoneisonwiththenew，greatlycommendsitselftomysenseofexpediency。And，therefore，itappearstomedesirablethatIshouldprefacesuchobservationsasImayhavetoofferuponthecloudofarguments（therelevancyofwhichtotheissuewhichIhadventuredtoraiseisnotalwaysobvious）putforthbyMr。GladstoneintheJanuarynumberofthisreview，<1>byanendeavourtomakecleartosuchofourreadersashavenothadtheadvantageofaforensiceducationthepresentnetresultofthediscussion。

Iamquiteawarethat，inundertakingthistask，Irunalltheriskstowhichthemanwhopresumestodealjudiciallywithhisowncauseisliable。ButitisexactlybecauseIdonotshunthatrisk，but，rather，earnestlydesiretobejudgedbyhimwhocomethafterme，providedthathehastheknowledgeandimpartialityappropriatetoajudge，thatIadoptmypresentcourse。

Inthearticleon"TheDawnofCreationandWorship，"itwillberememberedthatMr。Gladstoneunreservedlycommitshimselftothreepropositions。Thefirstisthat，accordingtothewriterofthePentateuch，the"water—population，"the"air—population，"

andthe"land—population"oftheglobewerecreatedsuccessively，intheordernamed。Inthesecondplace，Mr。

Gladstoneauthoritativelyassertsthatthis（aspartofhis"fourfoldorder"）hasbeen"soaffirmedinourtimebynaturalscience，thatitmaybetakenasademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact。"Inthethirdplace，Mr。Gladstonearguesthatthefactofthiscoincidenceofthepentateuchalstorywiththeresultsofmoderninvestigationmakesit"impossibletoavoidtheconclusion，first，thateitherthiswriterwasgiftedwithfacultiespassingallhumanexperience，orelsehisknowledgewasdivine。"Andhavingsettledtohisownsatisfactionthatthefirst"branchofthealternativeistrulynominalandunreal，"

Mr。Gladstonecontinues，"SostandsthepleaforarevelationoftruthfromGod，apleaonlytobemetbyquestioningitspossibility"（p。697）。

Iamasimple—mindedperson，whollydevoidofsubtletyofintellect，sothatIwillinglyadmitthattheremaybedepthsofalternativemeaninginthesepropositionsoutofallsoundingsattainablebymypoorplummet。Stillthereareagoodmanypeoplewhosufferunderalikeintellectuallimitation；and，foronceinmylife，IfeelthatIhavethechanceofattainingthatpositionofarepresentativeofaverageopinionwhichappearstobethemodernidealofaleaderofmen，whenImakefreeconfessionthat，afterturningthematteroverinmymind，withalltheaidderivedfromacarefulconsiderationofMr。

Gladstone’sreply，Icannotgetawayfrommyoriginalconvictionthat，ifMr。Gladstone’ssecondpropositioncanbeshowntobenotmerelyinaccurate，butdirectlycontradictoryoffactsknowntoeveryonewhoisacquaintedwiththeelementsofnaturalscience，thethirdpropositioncollapsesofitself。

Anditwasthisconvictionwhichledmetoenteruponthepresentdiscussion。Ifanciedthatifmyrespectedclients，thepeopleofaverageopinionandcapacity，couldoncebegotdistinctlytoconceivethatMr。Gladstone’sviewsastothepropermethodofdealingwithgraveanddifficultscientificandreligiousproblemshadpermittedhimtobaseasolemn"pleaforarevelationoftruthfromGod"uponanerrorastoamatteroffact，fromwhichtheintelligentperusalofamanualofpalaeontologywouldhavesavedhim，Ineednottroublemyselftooccupytheirtimeandattention[167]withfurthercommentsuponhiscontributiontoapologeticliterature。ItisforotherstojudgewhetherIhaveefficientlycarriedoutmyprojectornot。

ItcertainlydoesnotcountformuchthatIshouldbeunabletofindanyflawinmyowncase，butIthinkitcountsforagooddealthatMr。Gladstoneappearstohavebeenequallyunabletodoso。Hedoes，indeed，makeagreatparadeofauthorities，andIhavethegreatestrespectforthoseauthoritieswhomMr。Gladstonementions。Ifhewillgetthemtosignajointmemorialtotheeffectthatourpresentpalaeontologicalevidenceprovesthatbirdsappearedbeforethe"land—population"

ofterrestrialreptiles，Ishallthinkitmydutytoreconsidermyposition——butnottillthen。

ItwillbeobservedthatIhavecautiouslyusedtheword"appears"inreferringtowhatseemstometobeabsenceofanyrealanswertomycriticismsinMr。Gladstone’sreply。ForI

musthonestlyconfessthat，notwithstandinglongandpainfulstrivingsafterclearinsight，IamstilluncertainwhetherMr。

Gladstone’s"Defence"meansthatthegreat"pleaforarevelationfromGod"istobelefttoperishinthedialecticdesert；orwhetheritistobewithdrawnundertheprotectionofsuchskirmishersasareavailableforcoveringretreat。

Inparticular，theremarkabledisquisitionwhichcoverspages11

to14ofMr。Gladstone’slastcontributionhasgreatlyexercisedmymind。SocratesisreportedtohavesaidoftheworksofHeraclitusthathewhoattemptedtocomprehendthemshouldbea"Delianswimmer，"butthat，forhispart，whathecouldunderstandwassogoodthathewasdisposedtobelieveintheexcellenceofthatwhichhefoundunintelligible。

InendeavouringtomakemyselfmasterofMr。Gladstone’smeaninginthesepages，IhaveoftenbeenovercomebyafeelinganalogoustothatofSocrates，butnotquitethesame。

ThatwhichIdounderstandhasappearedtomesoverymuchthereverseofgood，thatIhavesometimespermittedmyselftodoubtthevalueofthatwhichIdonotunderstand。

InthispartofMr。Gladstone’sreply，infact，Ifindnothingofwhichthebearinguponmyargumentsiscleartome，exceptthatwhichrelatestothequestionwhetherreptiles，sofarastheyarerepresentedbytortoisesandthegreatmajorityoflizardsandsnakes，whicharelandanimals，arecreepingthingsinthesenseofthepentateuchalwriterornot。

IhaveeveryrespectforthesingeroftheSongoftheThreeChildren（whoeverhemayhavebeen）；Idesiretocastnoshadowofdoubtupon，but，onthecontrary，marvelat，theexactnessofMr。Gladstone’sinformationastotheconsiderationswhich"affectedthemethodoftheMosaicwriter"；nordoIventuretodoubtthattheinconvenientintrusionofthesecontemptiblereptiles——"afamilyfallenfromgreatness"（p。14），amiserabledecayedaristocracyreducedtomere"skulkersabouttheearth"

（ibid。）——inconsequence，apparently，ofdifficultiesabouttheoccupationoflandarisingoutoftheearth—hungeroftheirformerserfs，themammals——intoanapologeticargument，whichotherwisewouldrunquitesmoothly，isineverywaytobedeprecated。Still，thewretchedcreaturesstandthere，importunatelydemandingnotice；and，howeverdifferentmaybethepracticeinthatcontentiousatmospherewithwhichMr。

Gladstoneexpressesandlamentshisfamiliarity，intheatmosphereofscienceitreallyisofnoavailwhatevertoshutone’seyestofacts，ortotrytoburythemoutofsightunderatumulusofrhetoric。Thatismyexperienceofthe"ElysianregionsofScience，"whereinitisapleasuretometothinkthatamanofMr。Gladstone’sintimateknowledgeofEnglishlife，duringthelastquarterofacentury，believesmyphilosophicexistencetohavebeenroundedoffinunbrokenequanimity。

Howeverreprehensible，andindeedcontemptible，terrestrialreptilesmaybe，theonlyquestionwhichappearstometoberelevanttomyargumentiswhetherthesecreaturesareorarenotcomprisedunderthedenominationof"everythingthatcreepethupontheground。"

Mr。GladstonespeaksoftheauthorofthefirstchapterofGenesisas"theMosaicwriter"；Isuppose，therefore，thathewilladmitthatitisequallypropertospeakoftheauthorofLeviticusasthe"Mosaicwriter。"WhethersuchaphrasewouldbeusedbyanyonewhohadanadequateconceptionoftheassuredresultsofmodernBiblicalcriticismisanothermatter；but，atanyrate，itcannotbedeniedthatLeviticushasasmuchclaimtoMosaicauthorshipasGenesis。Therefore，ifonewantstoknowthesenseofaphraseusedinGenesis，itwillbewelltoseewhatLeviticushastosayonthematter。Hence，IcommendthefollowingextractfromtheeleventhchapterofLeviticustoMr。

Gladstone’sseriousattention:——

Andthesearetheywhichareuncleanuntoyouamongthecreepingthingsthatcreepupontheearth:theweasel，andthemouse，andthegreatlizardafteritskind，andthegecko，andthelandcrocodile，andthesand—lizard，andthechameleon。Thesearetheywhichareuncleantoyouamongallthatcreep（v。29—3l）。

ThemerestSunday—schoolexegesisthereforesufficestoprovethatwhenthe"Mosaicwriter"inGenesisi。24speaksof"creepingthings，"hemeanstoincludelizardsamongthem。

Thisbeingso，itisagreed，onallhands，thatterrestriallizards，andotherreptilesalliedtolizards，occurinthePermianstrata。ItisfurtheragreedthattheTriassicstrataweredepositedafterthese。Moreover，itiswellknownthat，evenifcertainfootprintsaretobetakenasunquestionableevidenceoftheexistenceofbirds，theyarenotknowntooccurinrocksearlierthantheTrias，whileindubitableremainsofbirdsaretobemetwithonlymuchlater。Henceitfollowsthatnaturalsciencedoesnot"affirm"thestatementthatbirdsweremadeonthefifthday，and"everythingthatcreepethontheground"onthesixth，onwhichMr。Gladstonerestshisorder；

for，asisshownbyLeviticus，the"Mosaicwriter"includeslizardsamonghis"creepingthings。"

PerhapsIhavegivenmyselfsuperfluoustroubleintheprecedingargument，forIfindthatMr。Gladstoneiswillingtoassume（hedoesnotsaytoadmit）thatthestatementinthetextofGenesisastoreptilescannot"inallpointsbesustained"（p。16）。Butmypositionisthatitcannotbesustainedinanypoint，sothat，afterall，ithasperhapsbeenaswelltogoovertheevidenceagain。AndthenMr。Gladstoneproceedsasifnothinghadhappenedtotellusthat——

Thereremaingreatunshakenfactstobeweighed。First，thefactthatsucharecordshouldhavebeenmadeatall。

Asmostpeopleshavetheircosmogonies，this"fact"doesnotstrikemeashavingmuchvalue。

Secondly，thefactthat，insteadofdwellingingeneralities，ithasplaceditselfunderthesevereconditionsofachronologicalorderreachingfromthefirstnisusofchaoticmattertotheconsummatedproductionofafairandgoodly，afurnishedandapeopledworld。

This"fact"canberegardedasofvalueonlybyignoringthefactdemonstratedinmypreviouspaper，thatnaturalsciencedoesnotconfirmtheorderassertedsofaraslivingthingsareconcerned；andbyupsettingafacttobebroughttolightpresently，towit，that，inregardtotherestofthepentateuchalcosmogony，prudentsciencehasverylittletosayonewayortheother。

Thirdly，thefactthatitscosmogonyseems，inthelightofthenineteenthcentury，todrawmoreandmoreofcountenancefromthebestnaturalphilosophy。

Ihavealreadyquestionedtheaccuracyofthisstatement，andI

donotobservethatmererepetitionaddstoitsvalue。

And，fourthly，thatithasdescribedthesuccessiveoriginsofthefivegreatcategoriesofpresentlifewithwhichhumanexperiencewasandisconversant，inthatorderwhichgeologicalauthorityconfirms。

Bycomparisonwithasentenceonpage14，inwhichafivefoldorderissubstitutedforthe"fourfoldorder，"onwhichthe"pleaforrevelation"wasoriginallyfounded，itappearsthatthesefivecategoriesare"plants，fishes，birds，mammals，andman，"which，Mr。Gladstoneaffirms，"aregiventousinGenesisintheorderofsuccessioninwhichtheyarealsogivenbythelatestgeologicalauthorities。"

Imustventuretodemurtothisstatement。Ishowed，inmypreviouspaper，thatthereisnoreasontodoubtthattheterm"greatseamonster"（usedinGen。i。21）includesthemostconspicuousofgreatseaanimals——namely，whales，dolphins，porpoises，manatees，anddugongs；<2>and，astheseareindubitablemammals，itisimpossibletoaffirmthatmammalscomeafterbirds，whicharesaidtohavebeencreatedonthesameday。Moreover，IpointedoutthatastheseCetaceaandSireniaarecertainlymodifiedlandanimals，theirexistenceimpliestheantecedentexistenceoflandmammals。

Furthermore，Ihavetoremarkthattheterm"fishes，"asused，technically，inzoology，bynomeanscoversallthemovingcreaturesthathavelife，whicharebiddento"fillthewatersintheseas"（Gen。i。20—22。）Marinemollusksandcrustacea，echinoderms，corals，andforaminiferaarenottechnicallyfishes。Buttheyareabundantinthepalaeozoicrocks，agesuponagesolderthanthoseinwhichthefirstevidencesoftruefishesappear。Andif，inageologicalbook，Mr。Gladstonefindsthequitetruestatementthatplantsappearedbeforefishes，itisonlybyacompletemisunderstandingthathecanbeledtoimagineitserveshispurpose。Asamatteroffact，atthepresentmoment，itisaquestionwhether，onthebareevidenceaffordedbyfossils，themarinecreepingthingorthemarineplanthastheseniority。Nocautiouspalaeontologistwouldexpressadecidedopiniononthematter。But，ifwearetoreadthepentateuchalstatementasascientificdocument（and，inspiteofallproteststothecontrary，thosewhobringitintocomparisonwithsciencedoseektomakeascientificdocumentofit），then，asitisquiteclearthatonlyterrestrialplantsofhighorganisationarespokenofinverses11and12，nopalaeontologistwouldhesitatetosaythat，atpresent，therecordsofseaanimallifearevastlyolderthanthoseofanylandplantdescribableas"grass，herbyieldingseedorfruittree。"

Thus，although，inMr。Gladstone’s"Defence，"the"oldorderpassethintonew，"hiscaseisnotimproved。Thefivefoldorderisnomore"affirmedinourtimebynaturalscience"tobe"ademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact"thanthefourfoldorderwas。Naturalscienceappearstometodeclinetohaveanythingtodowitheither；theyareaswrongindetailastheyaremistakeninprinciple。

Thereisanotherchangeofposition，thevalueofwhichisnotsoapparenttome，asitmaywellseemtobetothosewhoareunfamiliarwiththesubjectunderdiscussion。Mr。Gladstonediscardshisthreegroupsof"water—population，""air—

population，"and"land—population，"andsubstitutesforthem（1）fishes，（2）birds，（3）mammals，（4）man。Moreover，itisassumed，inanote，that"thehigherorordinarymammals"alonewereknowntothe"Mosaicwriter"（p。6）。Nodoubtitlooks，atfirst，asifsomethingweregainedbythisalteration；for，asI

havejustpointedout，theword"fishes"canbeusedintwosenses，oneofwhichhasadeceptiveappearanceofadjustabilitytothe"Mosaic"account。Thentheinconvenientreptilesarebanishedoutofsight；and，finally，thequestionoftheexactmeaningof"higher"and"ordinary"inthecaseofmammalsopensuptheprospectofahopefullogomachy。ButwhatisthegoodofitallinthefaceofLeviticusontheonehandandofpalaeontologyontheother？

As，inmyapprehension，thereisnotashadowofjustificationforthesuggestionthatwhenthepentateuchalwritersays"fowl"

heexcludesbats（which，asweshallseedirectly，areexpresslyincludedunder"fowl"inLeviticus），andasIhavealreadyshownthathedemonstrablyincludesreptiles，aswellasmammals，amongthecreepingthingsoftheland，Imaybepermittedtosparemyreadersfurtherdiscussionofthe"fivefoldorder。"

Onthewhole，itisseentoberathermoreinconsistentwithGenesisthanitsfourfoldpredecessor。

ButIhaveyetafreshordertoface。Mr。Gladstone（p。11）

understands"themainstatementsofGenesisinsuccessiveorderoftime，butwithoutanymeasurementofitsdivisions，tobeasfollows:——

1。Aperiodofland，anteriortoalllife（v。9，10）。

2。Aperiodofvegetablelife，anteriortoanimallife（v。11，12）。

3。Aperiodofanimallife，intheorderoffishes（v。20）。

4。Anotherstageofanimallife，intheorderofbirds。

5。Anotherintheorderofbeasts（v。24，25）。

6。Lastofall，man（v。26，27）。

Mr。Gladstonethentriestofindtheproofoftheoccurrenceofasimilarsuccessioninsundryexcellentworksongeology。

Iamreallygrievedtobeobligedtosaythatthisthird（orisitfourth？）modificationofthefoundationofthe"pleaforrevelation"originallysetforth，satisfiesmeaslittleasanyofitspredecessors。

For，inthefirstplace，IcannotaccepttheassertionthatthisorderistobefoundinGenesis。WithrespecttoNo。5，forexample，Ihold，asIhavealreadysaid，that"greatseamonsters"includestheCetacea，inwhichcasemammals（whichiswhat，Isuppose，Mr。Gladstonemeansby"beasts"）comeinunderheadNo。3，andnotunderNo。5。Again，"fowl"aresaidinGenesistobecreatedonthesamedayasfishes；thereforeI

cannotacceptanorderwhichmakesbirdssucceedfishes。

Oncemore，asitisquitecertainthattheterm"fowl"includesthebats，——forinLeviticusxi。13—19weread，"Andtheseshallyehaveinabominationamongthefowls……theheronafteritskind，andthehoopoe，andthebat，"——itisobviousthatbatsarealsosaidtohavebeencreatedatstageNo。3。Andasbatsaremammals，andtheirexistenceobviouslypresupposesthatofterrestrial"beasts，"itisquiteclearthatthelattercouldnothavefirstappearedasNo。5。Ineednotrepeatmyreasonsfordoubtingwhethermancame"lastofall。"

AsthelatterhalfofMr。Gladstone’ssixfoldorderthusshowsitselftobewhollyunauthorisedby，andinconsistentwith，theplainlanguageofthePentateuch，Imightdeclinetodiscusstheadmissibilityofitsformerhalf。

ButIwilladdoneortworemarksonthispointalso。DoesMr。

Gladstonemeantosaythatinanyoftheworkshehascited，orindeedanywhereelse，hecanfindscientificwarrantyfortheassertionthattherewasaperiodofland——bywhichIsupposehemeansdryland（forsubmergedlandmustneedsbeasoldastheseparateexistenceofthesea）——"anteriortoalllife？"

Itmaybeso，oritmaynotbeso；butwhereistheevidencewhichwouldjustifyanyoneinmakingapositiveassertiononthesubject？Whatcompetentpalaeontologistwillaffirm，atthispresentmoment，thatheknowsanythingabouttheperiodatwhichlifeoriginated，orwillassertmorethantheextremeprobabilitythatsuchoriginwasalongwayantecedenttoanytracesoflifeatpresentknown？Whatphysicalgeologistwillaffirmthatheknowswhendrylandbegantoexist，orwillsaymorethanthatitwasprobablyverymuchearlierthananyextantdirectevidenceofterrestrialconditionsindicates？

IthinkIknowprettywelltheanswerswhichtheauthoritiesquotedbyMr。Gladstonewouldgivetothesequestions；butI

leaveittothemtogivethemiftheythinkfit。

IfIventuredtospeculateonthematteratall，Ishouldsayitisbynomeanscertainthatseaisolderthandryland，inasmuchasasolidterrestrialsurfacemayverywellhaveexistedbeforetheearthwascoolenoughtoallowoftheexistenceoffluidwater。And，inthiscase，drylandmayhaveexistedbeforethesea。Astothefirstappearanceoflife，thewholeargumentofanalogy，whateveritmaybeworthinsuchacase，isinfavouroftheabsenceoflivingbeingsuntillongafterthehotwaterseashadconstitutedthemselves；andofthesubsequentappearanceofaquaticbeforeterrestrialformsoflife。

Butwhetherthese"protoplasts"would，ifwecouldexaminethem，bereckonedamongthelowestmicroscopicalgae，orfungi；oramongthosedoubtfulorganismswhichlieinthedebatablelandbetweenanimalsandplants，is，inmyjudgment，aquestiononwhichaprudentbiologistwillreservehisopinion。

IthinkthatIhavenowdisposedofthosepartsofMr。

Gladstone’sdefenceinwhichIseemtodiscoveradesigntorescuehissolemn"pleaforrevelation。"Butagreatdealofthe"ProemtoGenesis"remainswhichIwouldgladlypassoverinsilence，weresuchacourseconsistentwiththerespectduetosodistinguishedachampionofthe"reconcilers。"

Ihopethatmyclients——thepeopleofaverageopinions——havebythistimesomeconfidenceinme；forwhenItellthemthat，afterall，Mr。Gladstoneisofopinionthatthe"Mosaicrecord"

wasmeanttogivemoral，andnotscientific，instructiontothoseforwhomitwaswritten，theymaybedisposedtothinkthatImustbemisleadingthem。ButletthemlistenfurthertowhatMr。Gladstonesaysinacompendiousbutnotexactlycorrectstatementrespectingmyopinions:——

Heholdsthewriterresponsibleforscientificprecision:Ilookfornothingofthekind，butassigntohimastatementgeneral，whichadmitsexceptions；popular，whichaimsmainlyatproducingmoralimpression；summary，whichcannotbutbeopentomoreorlessofcriticismofdetail。Hethinksitisalecture。Ithinkitisasermon"（p。5）。

Inote，incidentally，thatMr。Gladstoneappearstoconsiderthatthedifferentiabetweenalectureandasermonis，thattheformer，sofarasitdealswithmattersoffact，maybetakenseriously，asmeaningexactlywhatitsays，whileasermonmaynot。Ihavequiteenoughonmyhandswithouttakingupthecudgelsfortheclergy，whowillprobablyfindMr。Gladstone’sdefinitionunflattering。

ButIamdivergingfrommyproperbusiness，whichistosaythatIhavegivennogroundfortheascriptionoftheseopinions；andthat，asamatteroffact，Idonotholdthemandneverhaveheldthem。ItisMr。Gladstone，andnotI，whowillhaveitthatthepentateuchalcosmogonyistobetakenasscience。

Mybelief，onthecontrary，is，andlonghasbeen，thatthepentateuchalstoryofthecreationissimplyamyth。Isupposeittobeanhypothesisrespectingtheoriginoftheuniversewhichsomeancientthinkerfoundhimselfabletoreconcilewithhisknowledge，orwhathethoughtwasknowledge，ofthenatureofthings，andthereforeassumedtobetrue。Assuch，Iholdittobenotmerelyaninteresting，butavenerable，monumentofastageinthementalprogressofmankind；andIfinditdifficulttosupposethatanyonewhoisacquaintedwiththecosmogoniesofothernations——andespeciallywiththoseoftheEgyptiansandtheBabylonians，withwhomtheIsraeliteswereinsuchfrequentandintimatecommunication——shouldconsiderittopossesseithermore，orless，scientificimportancethanmaybeallottedtothese。

Mr。Gladstone’sdefinitionofasermonpermitsmetosuspectthathemaynotseemuchdifferencebetweenthatformofdiscourseandwhatIcallamyth；andIhopeitmaybesomethingmorethantheslownessofapprehension，towhichIhaveconfessed，whichleadsmetoimaginethatastatementwhichis"general"but"admitsexceptions，"whichis"popular"and"aimsmainlyatproducingmoralimpression，""summary"andthereforeopento"criticismofdetail，"amountstoamyth，orperhapslessthanamyth。Putalgebraically，itcomestothis，x=a+b+c；alwaysrememberingthatthereisnothingtoshowtheexactvalueofeithera，orb，orc。

Itistruethataiscommonlysupposedtoequal10，butthereareexceptions，andthesemayreduceitto8，or3，or0；

balsopopularlymeans10，butbeingchieflyusedbythealgebraistasa"moral"value，youcannotdomuchwithitintheadditionorsubtractionofmathematicalvalues；calsoisquite"summary，"andifyougointothedetailsofwhichitismadeup，manyofthemmaybewrong，andtheirsumtotalequalto0，oreventoaminusquantity。

Mr。GladstoneappearstowishthatIshould（1）enteruponasortofessaycompetitionwiththeauthorofthepentateuchalcosmogony；（2）thatIshouldmakeafurtherstatementaboutsomeelementaryfactsinthehistoryofIndianandGreekphilosophy；

and（3）thatIshouldshowcauseformyhesitationinacceptingtheassertionthatGenesisissupported，atanyratetotheextentofthefirsttwoverses，bythenebularhypothesis。

Acertainsenseofhumourpreventsmefromacceptingthefirstinvitation。IwouldassoonattempttoputHamlet’ssoliloquyintoamorescientificshape。ButifIsupposedthe"Mosaicwriter"tobeinspired，asMr。Gladstonedoes，itwouldnotbeconsistentwithmynotionsofrespectfortheSupremeBeingtoimagineHimunabletoframeaformofwordswhichshouldaccurately，or，atleast，notinaccurately，expressHisownmeaning。Itissometimessaidthat，hadthestatementscontainedinthefirstchapterofGenesisbeenscientificallytrue，theywouldhavebeenunintelligibletoignorantpeople；buthowisthemattermendedif，beingscientificallyuntrue，theymustneedsberejectedbyinstructedpeople？

Withrespecttothesecondsuggestion，itwouldbepresumptuousinmetopretendtoinstructMr。GladstoneinmatterswhichlieasmuchwithintheprovinceofLiteratureandHistoryasinthatofScience；butifanyonedesirousoffurtherknowledgewillbesogoodastoturntothatmostexcellentandbynomeansreconditesourceofinformation，the"EncyclopaediaBritannica，"

hewillfind，undertheletterE，theword"Evolution，"andalongarticleonthatsubject。Now，Idonotrecommendhimtoreadthefirsthalfofthearticle；butthesecondhalf，bymyfriendMr。Sully，isreallyverygood。HewilltherefinditsaidthatinsomeofthephilosophiesofancientIndia，theideaofevolutionisclearlyexpressed:"Brahmaisconceivedastheeternalself—existentbeing，which，onitsmaterialside，unfoldsitselftotheworldbygraduallycondensingitselftomaterialobjectsthroughthegradationsofether，fire，water，earth，andotherelements。"Andagain:"InthelatersystemofemanationofSankhyathereisamoremarkedapproachtoamaterialisticdoctrineofevolution。"WhatlittleknowledgeI

haveofthematter——chieflyderivedfromthatveryinstructivebook，"DieReligiondesBuddha，"byC。F。Koeppen，supplementedbyHardy’sinterestingworks——leadsmetothinkthatMr。SullymighthavespokenmuchmorestronglyastotheevolutionarycharacterofIndianphilosophy，andespeciallyofthatoftheBuddhists。Butthequestionistoolargetobedealtwithincidentally。

And，withrespecttoearlyGreekphilosophy，<3>theseekerafteradditionalenlightenmentneedgonofurtherthanthesameexcellentstorehouseofinformation:——

TheearlyIonianphysicists，includingThales，Anaximander，andAnaximenes，seektoexplaintheworldasgeneratedoutofaprimordialmatterwhichisatthesametimetheuniversalsupportofthings。Thissubstanceisendowedwithagenerativeortransmutativeforcebyvirtueofwhichitpassesintoasuccessionofforms。Theythusresemblemodernevolutionistssincetheyregardtheworld，withitsinfinitevarietyofforms，asissuingfromasimplemodeofmatter。