Nov. 1, 1885.] 



KNOWLEDGE 



31 



15. At the beginning of the month, at the rising of 

 the night, 



16. His horns are breaking through to shine on the 

 heaven. 



17. On the seventh clay* to a circle he begins to swell. 



18. And stretches towards the dawn further. 



19. When the god Shamas (the snn) in tlie horizon of 

 heaven, in the east 



20 formed beautifully .... 



21 to its orbit Shamas was perfected .... 



The rest is lost, though it may hereafter be recovered ; 

 for it is known that several copies existed of this ancient 

 work. 



In the Assyrian account there is, of course, much which 

 is definitely inconsistent with modern science. We do 

 not imagine that the stars were purposely arranged in 

 figures of animals. We cannot recognise the planets as 

 having their paths assigned to them with reference to the 

 wants of our earth ; and we shotild certainly not admit 

 the loossibility that otir moon was sent out through the 

 great gates enclosing the lower chaos, and there and then 

 started (as it were from out the ribs of mother Egrth), 

 along that course whence she shines, for a few days in 

 each month, as " the light of the night until the rising 

 of the day." 



The account in Genesis is free from these defects. It 

 runs simply, — " And Elohim said, ' Let there be lights in 

 the expanse of the Heaven to divide between the day 

 and the nia:ht, and let them be for sig-ns and for seasons, 

 and for days and years ; and let them be for lights in the 

 expanse of the Heaven, to give light upon the Earth ; 

 and it was so. And Elohim made the two great lights, — 

 the greater light for the rule of the day, and the lesser 

 light for the rule of the night, — and the stars. And 

 Elohim (jave them in the expanse of the Heaven, to give 

 light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over 

 the night, and to divide between the light and the dark- 

 ness ; and Elohim saw that it was good." 



All this, while in perfect harmony, and cleai-lj' 

 meant to be in harmony, with the ideas which 

 prevailed in old times respecting the heavenlj^ bodies, 

 is yet not necessarily inconsistent with our modern 

 knowledge. We may interpret the account as we inter- 

 pret the words "The Heavens declare the Glory of God, 

 the iirmament showeth his handywork," iivhich no one 

 thinks of taking literally. It may be true that we 

 cannot accept the account as it was understood till 

 comparatively recent times. Knowing the stars to be 

 orbs exceeding our earth hiuidreds of thousands, nay — 

 some of them — millions of times, in volume, and severally 

 representing energies compared with which all terrestrial 

 things described in the first chapter of Genesis are as a 

 grain of sand compared with the earth's mass, we cannot 

 (if we accept the Bible account) understand it to signify 

 that the stars were individualh' made and set in the 

 expanse of heaven for no other purpose but to give light 

 to the earth. We know, indeed, that mtiltitiides of the 

 stars which actually exist, probably ntillions for each visible 

 star, are not lights in the heavens at all. But we may 

 take the Bible accotmt as telling those for whom it was 

 written that the sun and moon, and all the stars which 

 are as lights in our heavens, which serve therefore for 

 signs and seasons and for days and years, lire God's work, 

 and therefore aiv not to be worshipped as the Egyptians 

 and Assyrians worshipped them. Xor, while thus free 



* This corresponds with my theory that the week was originally 

 measured by reference to the half-moon phase— much more exactly 

 determinable than the time of full rcoon, 



from a peevish precision in our interpretation as relating 

 to space, need we be unduly exacting in regard to time, 

 either as to duration or as to sequence. To understand a 

 day's work, a second day's work, and so forth, too literally 

 in either respect, is in reality as absttrd as it would be to 

 understand God's " handywork '' as something fashioned 

 with hands such as men have. All that the account of 

 the heavenly bodies in Genesis need be regarded as really 

 implying is that God made those heavenlj' bodies which 

 are so useful to us, — and that in the host of heaven we 

 see another (a fourth, it chances to be in the narrative) of 

 the gre.at works of His Hand. This rightly understood, 

 and apart from Anthropomorphic interjiretations which 

 are inherently absurd, is the teaching of Science also. 



MISPRONUNCIATION. 



[Communicated.] 



K. ALEXANDERS letter (1889, Knowledge, 

 p. 185) interested me much. I give now a few 

 more examples of words in common use amongst 

 natives of India, but derived from English; — 

 Colonel, ker-r-r-nal ; captain, kaptan ; commander, 

 kamaneer; butler, bootrail ; cupboard, kappat; 

 glass, giliis ; American drill, Merikanderil ; bottle, 

 batli : flannel, fahinin ; cap, kep ((.c, percussion- 

 cap) : cartridge, cartoos ; pistol, pistol : line, lahin ; 

 fall in, fulin ; port arms, pote ar-r-rms ; unfi.t bayonets, un;)/)ix 

 bagnet (ph has not quite the sound of f as with us, tlie p is slightly 

 sounded): shoulder arms, chodar arms; present arms, pharjant 

 arms : bugle, beagle ; bos of matches, phire bokkus ; doctor, daktar ; 

 first assistant, phasht ashishtant ; barrister, balister ; engineer, 

 fcjnair; library, laibri ; class, kiliis; lash (of a whip), lasin. 



Here are some of the terms our butlers (bootrails) use : — Sponge 

 roll (pudding), ispaurol: beefsteak, beebishtake; divilled mutton, 

 double mutton; poached egg, pochuck; potato, batata; claret, 

 kilarat. 



Here the names of some of my dogs with their native equivalents : 

 — Drake, Rake: Ruby, Luby: Daisy, Lazy; Lena, Reena ; Panther, 

 I'ainter ; Sambo, Shumbhoo (name of a Hindu god) ; Scamp, Iscamp; 

 Demi (short for Democrat), Dammy; Toby, Topu (Hindustani for 

 " a hat ") ; Growler, Girowe. 



And here the names of some of my friends and acquaintances : — 

 Ashburner, Arsbrune : Beaman, Beeban; Booth, I'oot : Cox,Cokkus; 

 Crawford, Cnipat : Fenton, Phintan ; Gleig, Gillick; Macnaghten, 

 Slegiiatan; Peile, Pill; Philip, Villick ; Scott, Ishkat : Swetenham, 

 Soolteen. (Note.— a = a in calm, palm ; a = u in tub ; u as u in 

 tub; I'l as 00 in boot; eg. cntpat = era, as in craft, and j;af as put 

 in Putney.) 



Mr. Alexander might have added lakri (stick) as a word always 

 mispronounced by uneducated Europeans as " lackry." 



He is wrong in spelling it " gliiiriwan " ; there is no h ingari (cart 

 or carriage). 



I have heard tourists speak of Allahabad as Allerabad ; and of 

 Delhi as if it were Delhigh (as high tree, hill, mountain, i:c.). 

 Kathiiiwiin, India, Sept. 22, 1885. C. F. G. Lester. 



Dahwin at Ca.mbkidge. — Mr. Grant Allen, in his admirable 

 Life of Darwin (which will be reviewed by a kindred mind in next 

 month's Knowledge) remarks that "fortunately for us, Darwin did 

 not waste his time at Cambridge over the vain and frivolous pur- 

 suits of the Classical Tripos." A critic in a daily newspaper questions 

 tlie taste and the English of this remark. The English rightly 

 understood (as a University man would at once understand it) is 

 sound enough. Of the remark itself something more may be said 

 than that it is in good taste. It is well said ! It tells a trutli that 

 much needs telling. When we think liow many men that might 

 have done useful work have been turned into mere word-mongers, 

 doing nothing by which knowledge may be increased though some 

 at least among them might have done much, we feel that the 

 thought cannot be too plainly put or too often recalled. So with 

 Jlr. Allen's remark about Darwin's escape from Plato and .-iristotle, 

 and tlie useless— almost meaningless — mysteries of liarhira and 

 Cehrrnf, which might (Jlr. Allen says " infallibly would ") iiaye 

 overwhelmed him had he been an Oxford man. A little plain 

 speaking about such matters is very much needed— and good service 

 can never be bad form, 



