Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3.djvu/816

 CHRONOLOGY

732

CHRONOLOGY

mense antiquity. Professor Dana declares its age to be fifty millions of years; others suggest figures still more startling (cf. Guibert, "In the Beginning"; Molloy, "Geology and Revelation"; Hummelauer, "Gene- sis"; Hastings, "Dictionary of the Bible"; Mangenot in Vig., "Diet, de la Bible"; Driver, "Genesis". Perhaps the words of Genesis (i, 2): "The earth was void and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep", refer to the first phase of the Creation, the astronomical, before the geological period began. On such questions we have no Biblical evidence, and the Catholic is quite free to follow the teaching of science.

(2) Creation of Man. — The question which this subject suggests is: Can we confine the time that man has existed on earth within the limits usually as- signed, i. e. within about 4000 years of the birth of Christ? — The Church does not interfere with the free- dom of scientists to examine into this subject and form the best judgment they can with the aid of science. She evidently does not attach decisive in- fluence to the chronology of the Vulgate, the official version of the Western Church, since in the Martyr- ology for Christmas Day, the creation of Adam is put down in the year 5199 B. c, which is the reading of the Septuagint. It is, however, certain that we can- not confine the years of man's sojourn on earth to that usually set down. But, on the other hand, we are by no means driven to accept the extravagant con- clusions of some scientists. As Mangenot says (Vig., Diet, de la Bible, II, 720 sq.), speaking of the right of Catholics to follow the teaching of science: — "cer- tains tenants de l'archeologie prehistorique ont abuse de cette liberie et assigne une antiquite tres reculee a I'humanite" (certain champions of prehistoric archae- ology have abused this liberty and assigned to the human race an extremely remote antiquity). Thus Guibert writes (op. cit., p. 28): "Haeckel names more than 100,000 years; Burmeister supposed Egypt was peopled more than 72,000 years ago; Draper attrib- utes to European man more than 250,000 years; ac- cording to M. Joly, certain geologists accord to the human race 100,000 centuries; and G. de Mortillet shows that man's existence reaches to about 240,000 years." He adds, however: "These numbers have been built up on such arbitrary and fragile bases, that true science could not tolerate them long." In fact, M. Guibert is of opinion that with our present knowl- edge there is nothing compelling us to extend the ex- istence of man beyond 10,000 years. Such questions as the antiquity of civilization, which had reached a high pitch in Babylonia and Egypt 4000 years b. c, the radical differences of language at the same early period, differences of race (cf. the white, black, and yellow races), which do not seem to have been modi- fied within the historic period, and the remains of human workmanship going back to a very remote antiquity — all these things seem to lead to the con- clusion that the existence of man on earth goes back far beyond the traditional 4,000 years. Professor Driver says ("Genesis", p. xxxvi): "Upon the most moderate estimate it cannot be less than 20,000 years."

(3) Creation to the Flood. — The period from the ( nation to the Flood is measured by the genealogical table of the ten patriarchs in Genesis, v, and Genesis, vii, 6. But the exact meaning of chapter v has not

1 n clearly defined. Critical writers point out that

the number ten is a common one amongst ancient peoples in the list of their prehistoric heroes, and that they attribute fabulous lengths to tht- lives of these men; thus, the Chaldeans reckon for their first ten heroes, who lived in the period from the Creation ti> the Flood, a space of 432.1 mn years. This seems to point to .some common nucleus of truth or primitive tradition which became distorted and exaggerated in the course of ages. Various explanations have been given of chapter v to explain the .short time it seems

to allow between the Creation and the Flood. One is that there are lacunse in it, and, though it is not easy to see how that can be, still it has to be remembered that they exist in St. Matthew (i, 8) in precisely simi- lar circumstances. That there are difficulties about the genealogical table in chapter v, we know; for, as may be seen from the accompanying table, the total number of years in the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Sep- tuagint differs, in the Hebrew, it being 1656, in the Samaritan, 1307, and in the Septuagint, 2242.

Names of the Patriarchs

Age at birth of s

.n:-

Hebrew Samaritan

Sept.

Adam

130

130

230

Seth

105

105

205

Enos

90

90

190

Cainan

70

70

170

Malaleil

65

65

165

Jared

162

62

162

Enoch

65

65

165

Mathusalem

187

67

167

Lameeh

182

53

188

Noe

500

500

500

From Noe to Flood

100

100

100

Creation to Flood

1656

1307

2242

From an inspection of the above table it is obvious that the diversity is due to systematic change — whether to increase the total length of the period or to reduce the age at which the patriarchs had chil- dren or for some other reason, we know not. One thing can be confidently asserted, that the length of time between the creation of Adam and the Flood can- not be restricted within the period traditionally set down. It may also be said that "for this period the chronology of the Bible is quite uncertain" (Vigou- roux, Diet., 273), and that the freedom of the Catholic in investigating the chronology of this period is quite unrestricted.

(4) The Flood to the Birth of Abraham. — The years between the Flood and Abraham are computed in the Book of Genesis by the genealogy of chapter xi (10-26).

Names of the Patriarchs

Age at birth of son: — Hebrew Samaritan Sept.

Sem (father of Arphaxad) Arphaxad (father of Cainan) Cainan (father of Sale) Sale (father of Heber) Heber ^father of Phaleg) Phaleg I father of Reu) Ken i father of Sarug) Sarug (father of Nachor) Nachor (father of Thare) Thare (father of Abraham

102 35

30 34 30 32 30 29 70

102 135

130

134 130 132 130 79 70

102 135 130 130 134 130 132 130 79 70

Years from birth of Sem ) to birth of Abraham \

Deduct years of Sem's ) age at time of flood j

392

100

1042

100

1172 100

Add for age of Abraham )

at time of his call )

292

75

942 75

1072 75

Hence, number of years!

from Flood to Call of-

Abraham 1

367

1017

11 IT

Again, however, the numbers in the table above differ in the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint, being re- spectively 367, 1017, and 1147; and it will be observed