V MR. GLADSTONE AND GENESIS 175 



discards his three groups of "water-population," 

 " air-population," and " land -population/' and sub- 

 stitutes for them (1) fishes, (2) birds, (3) mam- 

 mals, (4) man. Moreover, it is assumed, in a 

 note, that " the higher or ordinary mammals " 

 alone were known to the " Mosaic writer " (p. 6). 

 No doubt it looks, at first, as if something were 

 gained by this alteration; for, as I have just 

 pointed out, the word " fishes " can be used in 

 two senses, one of which has a deceptive appear- 

 ance of adjustability to the " Mosaic " account. 

 Then the inconvenient reptiles are banished out 

 of sight ; and, finally, the question of the exact 

 meaning of "higher" and "ordinary" in the 

 case of mammals opens up the prospect of a 

 hopeful logomachy. But what is the good of it 

 all in the face of Leviticus on the one hand and 

 of palaeontology on the other ? 



As, in my apprehension, there is not a shadow 

 of justification for the suggestion that when the 

 pentateuchal writer says " fowl " he excludes bats 

 (which, as we shall see directly, are expressly 

 included under "fowl" in Leviticus), and as I 

 have already shown that he demonstrably includes 

 reptiles, as well as mammals, among the creeping 

 things of the land, I may be permitted to spare 

 my readers further discussion of the " fivefold 

 order." On the whole, it is seen to be rather 

 more inconsistent with Genesis than its fourfold 

 predecessor. 



