54 THEOPHILUS G. PINCHES, ESQ., LL.D._, M.E.A.S., ON 



Now where did that chapter come from Mr. Boscawen may say 

 that it came into existence in Babylon in the seventh century 

 before Christ. I see no reason why we should say it came into 

 existence then, rather 2,250 years before Christ. If the legend be 

 based on the facts, they must have been known before the legend 

 was composed, or as far back as 2,500 years B.C. But those facts 

 could not have been known as the result of scientific investigation. 

 They must have been supernaturally communicated. There was 

 no known scientific investigation that could have revealed them. 

 We are therefore brought, I think, to this conclusion, that there 

 must have been a communication of these facts to mankind before 

 they appeared, as Mr. Boscawen says, in Assyrian and Babylonian 

 literature. So also with regard to the Hebrew account, there may 

 have been editing ; but composing such narratives as those is quite 

 another thing. Editorial touches here and there there may be, 

 but there is not the slightest foundation for believing in the 

 existence of any Jehovistic or Eliohistic documents. There is no 

 trace of any such documents in all the literature of antiquity, and 

 neither Jew nor Gentile knew anything about them until in 

 recent years they were invented in the brains of the higher critics. 



Dr. Pinches, in reply, said : Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, 

 I do not think at this late hour I need address you at any length. 



The remarks on my paper have been rather more of the nature of 

 comment than criticism, and here I may say that I thank all who 

 have joined in the discussion for their remarks, and especially 

 Mr. Boscawen for his fairness. 



It is a matter of great regret to me that I was unable to 

 incorporate the discoveries of Mr. King in my paper in time to read 

 it to-night, but I hope, as I have said, to make up deficiencies .when 

 my paper is in print. 



It is needless to say that I agree with most of what Mr. Boscawen 

 has said concerning the date of the legend and many other points. 

 I shall certainly examine the lines which he mentions of the non- 

 Semitic story of the creation — lines 16, 17 and 19 — in order to go 

 over, if I can, to his point of view. 



Concerning the remarks of Mr. Rouse, I would mention the point 

 of the week, and that I do without reference to any question as to 

 the existence of the creative week. Certain days are mentioned as 

 being unlucky days (the word used is hul-gal, " evil-making "), and 



