246 W. p. JAMES, ESQ. 



of grotesque and mythological details, its sublime brevity are 

 obvious to all, and have extorted the admiration of the heathen 

 Longinus, A more subtle distinction from all other cosmo- 

 logies, with the doubtful exception of the Zoroastrian, is that 

 it implies the original creation of matter by God. Such a 

 notion as creation ex nihilo could never have risen spon- 

 taneously among early men. And yet it is embodied in 

 possibly the oldest document in existence. In this fact is 

 found a strong presumption in favour of its having been a 

 special revelation. 



The importance of creation ex nihilo belongs to the pro- 

 vince of theology, from which I am properly excluded by the 

 historical method to which I have adhered. I will conclude 

 with expressing my own personal conviction that in this 

 venerable document we probably have a record handed down 

 from father to son as far as Abraham, by Abraham brought 

 into Palestine, and ultimately committed to writing by Moses. 



The Chairman (W. N. West, Esq.). — In offering the thanks of the 

 meeting to Mr. Cadman Jones for the admirable manner in which he has 

 read this paper, we must all feel a deep regret at the loss the Institute has 

 sustained in the death of its talented author. "We shall now be glad to 

 hear any remarks that may be offered by those present. 



Mr. W. St. C. Boscawen, F.E. Hist. Soc. — The paper read this evening is 

 one of great interest, especially at a time like the present, when the first 

 chapter of Genesis has called into play two of the greatest minds in England ; 

 for, when we find men like Professor Huxley and Mr. Gladstone fighting over 

 that particular portion of the Old Testament, we may feel assured that it is 

 undergoing very severe criticism. The subject embraced by Mr. James's paper 

 is one to which he has given a wide scope, and, if I may be permitted to say 

 so, I am afraid the author has taken almost too extensive a range, inasmuch 

 as, in my humble opinion, the Indian and Greek traditions, to which he has 

 referred, can hardly be brought within the limits of this discussion, because 

 we scarcely know the sources from which they come, and, moreover, they 

 differ so essentially from the older Hebrew and Chaldean traditions that 

 they ought not to be admitted into a coubideration of the relationship 

 borne by the first chapter of Genesis to the really old traditions of the world's 

 cosmogony. If we look into the traditions that have come down to us, we 

 find that there are three which stand out disthictly as what are known as the 

 ancient traditions, and they are also remarkable from the fact of their close 

 relationship to each other, These three traditions are, first, the Phoenician, 

 secondly, the Hebrew, and thirdly, the Chaldean, audit is evident that they 

 have a common origin, as far as locality is concerned. It is now very 

 generally admitted that the Phoenicians came from the shores of the Persian 

 Gulf, and few will deny that the same land was the birthplace of the 



