in 



LECTURES ON EVOLUTION 63 



the first place, I have discarded the title of the 

 " doctrine of creation," because my present busi- 

 ness is not with the question why the objects 

 which constitute Nature came into existence, but 

 when they came into existence, and in what order. 

 This is as strictly a historical question as the 

 question when the Angles and the Jutes invaded 

 England, and whether they preceded or followed 

 the Romans. But the question about creation is 

 a philosophical problem, and one which cannot 

 be solved, or even approached, by the historical 

 method. What we want to learn is, whether the 

 facts, so far as they are known, afford evidence 

 that things arose in the way described by Milton, 

 or whether they do not ; and, when that question 

 is settled, it will be time enough to inquire into 

 the causes of their origination. 



In the second place, I have not spoken of this 

 doctrine as the Biblical doctrine. It is quite true 

 that persons as diverse in their general views as 

 Milton the Protestant and the celebrated Jesuit 

 Father Suarez, each put upon the first chapter of 

 Genesis the interpretation embodied in Milton's 

 poem. It is quite true that this interpretation is 

 that which has been instilled into every one of us 

 in our childhood ; but I do not for one moment 

 venture to say that it can properly be called the 

 Biblical doctrine. It is not my business, and 

 does not lie within my competency, to say what 

 the Hebrew text does, and what it does not 



