BISHOP USSHER, JOHN LI6HTF00T AND THE AGE OF CREATION

Transcription

1 BISHOP USSHER, JOHN LI6HTF00T AND THE AGE OF CREATION William R. Brice Geology and Planetary Science Department University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown Johnstown, Pennsylvania Abstract One of the most commonly quoted dates in historical geology texts is the time of creation as calculated by James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh and published in However, the date is frequently quoted incorrectly and the nine o'clock hour which is often quoted with the date comes not from Ussher, but from a contemporary, John Lightfoot of Cambridge. A 1658 English version of Ussher T s Annales has creation occurring, ".... upon the entrance of the night preceding the twenty third day of October in the year of the Julian Calendar 710." In the Annales there is no mention of an exact time. The nine o T clock hour comes from a 1642 work of John Lightfoot T s and is associated not with the actual creation of the world, but is concerned only with the creation of man; "... about the third hour of the day, or nine of the clock in the morning." Based upon his comments in the preface of Annales, Ussher appears to have used both astronomical cycles and the timing of events in the Old Testament to arrive at his precise date. Key words: Geology teaching; geochronology; historical geology; paleoecology; stratigraphy. A date which is found in most historical geology books is the time of creation as determined by the Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, in Since 1982 is near the 400th anniversary of Ussher T s birth, it is fitting that we should take a close look at what he actually said and how he arrived at such a precise date. Let me begin by listing quotations taken from several historical books published over the last thirty or so years (1) "... to that of Archbishop Ussher of Ireland, who in 1654 deduced from his study of the Scriptures that Creation had taken place on the twenty-sixth of October, in the year 4004 BC, at nine o'clock in the morning." (1949) (2) "Archbishop Ussher, who set the date of creation as October 29, 4004 BC " (1954) (3) "James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh (Ireland), calculated in 1654, from studies of the Scriptures, that the Creation had taken place on the twenty-sixth of October, in the year 4004 BC at nine o T clock in the morning." (1961) (4) "....He [Ussher] announced the precise year in which the world had been created 4004 BC. A later scholar refined the date given further. The Creation had taken place on October 26 at 9 o'clock in the morning." (1978) (5) "In Anglican Archbishop Ussher,... announced with great certainty that,... the world had been created in the year 4004 BC on the 26 th of October at nine o'clock in the morning!" (1981) Aside from the name (Archbishop Ussher) and the date (October 4004 BC) all are incorrect. The range of publication dates ( ) indicates that this misinformation is not a recent phenomenon, and appears to have arisen from a series of inaccurate quotations by authors who did not take the time to check original sources. Most of those quoted here seem to have used the same incorrect source, note the common use of October 26 at 9 a.m. Interestingly enough, in none of the above quotations is there any reference cited for the material quote The authors responsible for these errors have been omitted here purposely because these quotations are only very small items from otherwise good historical geology texts. Obviously, the quotations were chosen to illustrate a point and many texts are more accurate in their statements about Archbishop Ussher. However, the incorrect quotations are, unfortunately, far from rare. James Ussher ( ) (Figure 1), in addition to being the Archbishop of Armagh, served also as Vice-Chancellor of Trinity College, Dublin, and was a well-known biblical scholar. His complete works run to seventeen volumes (Elrington, 1864). Even before receiving his B.A. from Trinity College (assumed to be July 1597), he had produced a biblical chronology in Latin which most likely formed the basis for his later work, Annales (Stephen and Lee, 1973b). It is in Annales (p.l) that the often quoted (and misquoted) date of creation appears (see Figure 2). A partial translation of this passage taken from the 1658 English version (see Figure 3) is: In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth, Gen. I. V.I. Which beginning of time, according to our chronologie, fell upon the entrance of the night preceding the twenty third day of October in the year of the Julian calendar, 710. Upon the first day therefore of the world, or October 23, being our Sunday... On the second day (October 24 being Monday) the firmament being finished, which was called Heaven, a separation was made of the waters above, and the waters here beneath enclosing the Earth. Thus, from Annales do we get the date, day of the week and the timing of Creation: October 22 (the night before October 23) at the beginning of the evening, and although the above quotations got the Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 18

2 in the year of the world, three thousand nine hundred twenty and eight. Hence, Lightfoot put the time of creation at 3928 BC, quite close to the 4004 BC which Ussher specified in Lightfoot appears to have used the ages of individuals mentioned in the Old Testament as a means of arriving at this date, for he goes on to say:... may the Reader gently have the patience to see and to examine the particular sums by which the Scripture accounteth to make up this total, and to study upon those scruples in the several parcels where they come that make the account intricate and doubtful, and to judge upon those resolutions and satisfactions that shall be tendered for the cleering and untying of those scruples. (Lightfoot, 1644) Figure 1. Bishop James Ussher. (From Knox, 1967) month correct, all had the date wrong. Indirectly, Ussher indicates that the event took place on a Saturday evening, because, if the first day was a Sunday, October 23rd, then October 22nd, "the entrance of the night preceding... ", must have been Saturday evening. Putting the time of Creation in the morning originates not with Bishop Ussher, but with a contemporary of his, John Lightfoot ( ). Lightfoot was a graduate of Christ! s College, Cambridge, who distinguished himself as a Biblical scholar and eventually became Vice-Chancel lor of Cambridge, (Stephen and Lee, 1973a). In 1642 John Lightfoot published his Observations on Genesis as a short book of twenty pages. Figure 4 is from a 1682 reprint of this 1642 work in which Lightfoot paraphrases the Genesis story. He does not offer any date or time until he gets to verse 26 (Figure 5). This seems to be where the oft-quoted nine o'clock in the morning originates, and it actually predated publication of Ussher T s chronology by eight years. In this 1642 work the time specified is the time of the creation of man, not the worl Lightfoot continued his biblical series with The Harmony of The Four Evangelists..., a three part series, Part I, 1644; Part E, 1647; Part IE, 1655 (reprinted as a single volume in 1658). In the "Prolegom I" of Part I, Lightfoot (1644) gets more specific with the timing of biblical events. Now the Scripture carrying on a most faithful reckoning of the times, from the beginning of time to this fulness of it, hath laid this great, wondrous, and happy occurrence of the birth of the Redeemer What follows then is a description of how old each person was when his offspring were born, taken from his earlier work, Observations... In 1647 Lightfoot put all this information into a table which is reproduced here as Figure 6. Similar tables appear in Ussher's work also. In the same "Prolegom, I" Lightfoot recounts the total time since Creation, using an actual month, September, and by implication suggests that this was the month of Creation: And now he that desireth to know the year of the World, which is now passing over us is this year 1644 will find it to be 5572 years just finished since the Creation, and the year 5573 of the Worlds age, now newly begun this September at the Equinox. (Lightfoot, 1644) The use of the autumnal equinox was common practice among scholars who dealt with biblical chronology (Reese, et al, 1981), and, as Lightfoot makes the year change in September, this suggests Creation occurred in September. Thus, this work of Lightfoot's appears to be the source of the September Creation date sometimes attributed to Ussher. The fact that the autumnal equinox is taken as the point of beginning can account for such dates as September 17th or September 23rd being quoted as coming from both Ussher and Lightfoot. However, exact quotations such as "9:00 in the morning on September seventeenth" (Dunbar, 1960), attributed to John Lightfoot appear to be derived by implication, and should not be given as direct quotation. At times authors get carried away with these dates: He [John Lightfoot] declared in 1642 that he entirely endorsed Archbishop Ussher and that Heaven and Earth, center and circumference, was created all together in the same instant and clouds full of water... This took place and man was created by the Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C. at nine o'clock in the morning! (Millar, 1972) Figure 5 illustrates that only part of this quotation is correctly stated; with part coming from Ussher and part coming from another page of Lightfoot's 1642 Observations... What is even stranger in this statement is the section about Lightfoot in 1642 agreeing with Ussher, because Ussher did not publish his Annales until The ages of the Old Testament prophets hold an important place in the chronologies of both Ussher and Lightfoot. Figure 7 shows a portion of a page Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 19

3 ANNALES VETERIS TESTAMENTL a PRIMA MUNDI ORIGINE V E T> V C T I : UNA CUM RERUM ASIATIC A RUM ET i E Q Y P T I A C A R U M CHRONICO, TEMPOR1S HISTORICI PRINCIPIO ufque ad Maccabaicorum initia P^ODUCTO. J A CO $ 0 NiSS B^JO D I G I S T O R E. A R M A C H A N O LOUD 1 2il, Ex Official J. Flefier, proftanc apud J. Crook 6c J. Baker, fublnfigni Ndvk in CoKDCtClioS> P A ui> I r M DCL. Figure 2. Title page of Annales. (Photograph courtesy of Ronald Lane Reese, Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Virginia.) from the English version of Annales where Ussher lists the ages of various Biblical prophets at the time of certain genealogical milestones By comparing Figures 6 and 7, the similarities and differences become apparent. Where Lightfoot gives but one set of dates and ages, Ussher used four different sources to arrive at a time between Creation and the Flood, and they are not the same; Hebrew, 1656 years, Samaritan Pentateuch, 1307 years, the Septuagint as computed by Eusebius, 2242 years; and an Ethiopic text which put the period at 2262 years. However, Ussher claimed the Hebrew text was the most reliable, citing "Hebrew verity," (Knox, 1967) and these are the numbers which appear in Figures 6 and 7. A table showing the first three of these appeared in the posthumous work edited by Thomas Barlow, Chronologia Sacra published at Oxford in Ussher was certainly not the first to attempt such a determination. (For an excellent review see Dean, 1981.) Reese, et al (1981) make mention of Chronologie de Vhistoire sainte (1738) by Alphonse des Vignolles in which over 200 different computations for the time of creation can be found in the preface. Leonard Horner, in his presidential address in 1861, quotes from des Vignolles, and Horner mentions also the list of Rev. Dr. Hales which, "... THE ANNALS OF THE W O R L D.!Deduced from The Origin of Time, and continued to the j beginning of the Emperour Vefpafans Reign, and the totall Deftrudhcn and Abolitionof the Temple and Comrr wealth of thzfevs. Containing the H I S T O R I E OftheOLD and NEW TESTAMENT, Withthat olthe M A C C H A B E E S, Alfo all the moft Memorable Affairs owafia and Egypt, And the Rife of the Empire of the2^w/4/i C<efdTsy under.and 03a*pianus. COLLECTED From ill Hiftory, as well Sacred, as Prophane,and Methodically digertd, By the moft Reverend f A MS S USS H81{, Biftiopof AR MAG H, and Primate of IRELAND. L 0 > 0, Printed by % T Y L E R, for J. C R o o K, at tlie Sign of the Ship in^sttpauls Church -yard, and for Q.m B KDEM. at the Middle'Temple-Q*tc, in Fleet-Street, M. D C. L V111 Figure 3. Title page of the English version of Ussher T s Annales. (Ussher, 1658) might be swelled to 300" (Horner, 1861). In fact the year 4004 was not unique to Ussher (Reese, et al, 1981). A total of 6000 years for the age of the earth had been commonly used before either Ussher or Lightfoot published their work. For example Shakespeare, around 1600, wrote: The poor world is almost six thousand years old, and in all this time there was not any man died in his own person, videlicet, in a love cause. (Rosalind, Act IV, Scene 1, As You Like It) One possible source for the 6000 year age is Psalm 90, verse 4 where there is a reference to 1000 years being equal to a day in the sight of Go Hence, the six days of Creation would be 6000 years in human chronology. However, in the English speaking world it is the date of Bishop Ussher that we know best because it was added as a marginal note to the English Bible in 1701, and was printed thereafter in the large annual Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 20

4 A Few, and New OBSERVATIONS, THE UPON BOOK G E N E S I S - THE Mod of them Certain, the reft Probable, alt Haimlefi, * Strange, and rarely heard of before. ALSO AM Handful of Gleanings OUT.OF THE BOOK E X O D U S. MDC L XXXII. Figure 4. Title page of John Lightfoot's Observations... published in (Print taken from a 1682 reprint when it was combined with another book.) reprints from the Clarendon Press at Oxfor (Lyell, 1875; Kenyon, 1958) Leonard Horner states:... to an edition in folio of the Bible, published in 1701, under the direction of Archbishop Tenison, Dr. Lloyd, Bishop of Worcester, added chronological dates at the head of several columns, and on the margin of the title of Genesis the following: "Year before the common year of Christ, 4004."... The copy of the Bible in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, in which that date first appears over against the first verse of Genesis, bears the date of 1727; but there is no doubt that for more than a century and a half that unauthorized marginal note has been added, up to the present time. (Horner, 1861) In a footnote to the above passage Horner further states that he saw a folio Bible printed at Liege in 1702 with the French translation and the Latin side by side where 4004 years is printed as a marginal note for Creation against the first verse of Genesis, and that the 1860 edition by the Queen's Printer in London had the same marginal note. Reese, et al. whichiwis hrr prime day, and tbc Xhewtd tier creicent ana gave light to Adtm, who** ^ t n ^ g i " ihattune out of the darkntfi of hi. fajl. by the lufoe of* Pr^/ai. Whalef only of all bhites fpecified by name, to (bew that even the gitateft of living creatures could not nuke it fcl Verf. 35. Beafts wild an3 tame created, and all manner of creeping things, and the World furnifbed with ihem from about Eden as well as with men: of clean beafts were fcven created, three couplet for breed, and the odd opeforadamt facrifice upon his 611 but of unclean ooly one couple ft* the propagation of the kin Verf. a6. Min created by the Trtmtj about tbc third hour of the day, or nine of the clock in the morning. CHAP. H. The three firft verfes, that treat of the inftitution of the Sabbath, area* cotdinp to their^roper Order of time, to be taken in at ttor end of the third chapter. Figure 5. Verse 26 from Lightfoot T s 1644 Observations upon the Book of Genesis. Print taken from a 1682 reprint.) (1981) state that as recently as the early Twentieth Century the Bible was still being printed with Ussher! s date in the margin. In fact, my copy of the King James Version, printed in 1945, has 4004 BC printed as a note in Genesis. So, from what appears to have been an unauthorized marginal note in 1701, this date of 4004 BC has been regarded as "Gospel" by many people ever since. Ussher claims that his precision arises from several lines of evidence, for example, from earlier Biblical scholars, and from astronomical reasoning. In "The Epistle of the Reader," the Preface to his Annales, he begins by quoting earlier writers indicating how vague many of them are, and he states that only "Divine Revelation" could reveal the true time By JOHN LIGHTFOOT P,D. back to the beginning of the worl Ussher takes into account the way writers of the Scriptures tended to work by rounding off to the nearest whole year. To quote Ussher: LONDON, As for example, when the Israelites are said to go PriM* bffv.sl Sot R+rt Scm, TUm* Bfffit, J*U Wright t anil Rkimi out of Egypt, the fifteenth day of the first moneth: and Solomon to begin to build the Temple, in the 480 year after their departure, on the second day on the second month, the moneths and dayes which bound each termination of that Period, shew, that 11 moneths and 14 dayes are to be taken away... for the space of that Perio 1658, p. A5) Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 21 (Ussher, Although Ussher quotes one earlier scholar as suggesting that those who attempt this kind of calculation, "... seem to me more worthy of encouragement than praise, in that they attempt a thing above human capacity," (David Paraeus quoted by Ussher in "The Epistle to the Reader" Annales 1658, p. A5) he did not hesitate to do the "thing above human capacity." Ussher felt: But if anyone, well seen in the knowledge, not onely of Sacred and exotick History, but of Astronomical Calculations, and the old Hebrew Kalender, shall apply himself to these studies, I judge it indeed difficult, but not impossible for such a one to attain, not onely the number of years, but even, of dayes from the Creation of the Worl" (Ussher, 1658, p. A5) One interesting aspect of Ussher T s work is the method he used to arrive at 4004 BC for the time of Creation. He outlines this methodology in "The Epistle to the Reader," the Preface to the Annales. It appears that this is another area where Ussher has been somewhat misrepresente General ly, when

5 Thefirft Age of the World : From the Creation to the Flood: This fpace is called, Early in the morning, MaL: Hilar, in be. Ten Fathers befoir the Flood Adam hath Cam and Abel, and lofeth thcra both, Gen. 4. unhappy in his children, the greateft earthly happinefs, that he may think of Heaven the * Seth born in original fin, Gen. 5. 3, 3. a holy man: and father of all men after the Flood, Nmmb.24.1y. to (hew all men bora in that effete Eftojb born: corruption in Religion by Idolatry begun, Gen Eaefh therefore ft> named, SirrmfkL 335 >95 90 I Kuanan born: A mourner for the corruption of the times. 265 I 160 j 70 I Mahalalctl born: A pratfer of the Lar ' , * c ,662 9I2 807;717 the fctccth from Aimin 821,731 theholy lint of prophecicd QIO gaiofl U*wicked- K6that Ltmtcbthe 1 fereothfront Aitmhithe nrm IkeofCM had fared born : when there is ftill a defcending from evil to worie. ' Enoch bornt and Dedicated to God : the feventh from Adamy Jude fared J MethnJ!xlah born: his very name foretold the Floo The leafc of the world is only for hirkfc C c s j !30 f Lamcch born. A man fmttten with grief for the prelent corruption and future punifhmeot r68 18a a Adam dieth: having lived years witnin 7a Now 70 years a whole age, 9a ID. Enoch tranflated : next after Adams death: mortality taught in that, immortality tnthii. 55 Seth dieth Noah bom a comforter s6 6s < i > * E**jb dieth. 95 Km «> 516 5$ dieth. MahsUetl dieth. 132 Jtreddieth. 346 "4 The CXX. years begin, Gem > I! Jfbet bom. Sem bom I Lameebdieth. 10c { Mctbmjbtlah dieth, and the Flood With theftory of this fifth Chapter, read i Qbron. 1.1,2,3,4, which are an abridgment of it Figure 6. Table of Old Testament Chronology by John Lightfoot. (Lightfoot, 1647) those who quote Ussher give any explanation of his methods, the only aspect mentioned is his work with the ages of the Old Testament prophets. For example: "... James Ussher,... occupied himself with the numerology of the Old Testament from which he deduced..." (Millar, 1972). Even Knox (1967) in a biography of Ussher states:... he set himself to this [the chronology] task with confidence because he was sure that... when a reference to a year occurs this signifies a year of three hundred and sixty-five days. On this basis and by following the ages of the patriarchs, priests, judges and kings he reached the famous estimate of 4004 as the number of years which elapsed from the creation to the coming of Christ. (Knox, 1967) However, this is not exactly what Ussher himself says in "The Epistle to the Reader" where he states: And to us there is no measure of time more known, and more accomodatious to the common collation of times than the form of the Julian Years and Months, deduced from the middle of the night beginning the Kalends of January, of the first year of the common account from Christ; with those three Cicles, by which being joyned, every year is distinguished from all other years whatsoever. For example, the Roman indiction 15 years, the Cicle of the Moon, or Golden Number 19, and the Cicle of the Sun (the Index of Sun=day, or our Lords Day) containing the Period of twenty eight years. Nor is there any thing more or better known than That at this day, the year (I do not say of the true Nativity of Christ, which is controverted amongst the Learned, but) of the common Christian era MDCL is noted with the Caracters of 3 in the Roman indiction, 17 in the Lunar Cicle, and 7 in that of the Sun. (Ussher, 1658) In this passage Ussher is laying the groundwork for the calculations to come. He continues: But for as much as our Christian Epoch falls many Ages after the beginning of the World, and the number of years before that backward, is not onely more troublesome; but (unless greater care be taken) more lyable to errour. Also it hath pleased our Modern Chronologers, to adde to that generally received Hypothesis, (which asserted the Julian Years, with their three Cycles by a certain Mathematical prolepsis; to have run down to the very beginning of the World) an artificial Epoch, framed out of Three Cycles multiplied in themselves; for the Solar Cicle being multiplied by the Lunar, or the number of 28, by 19, produces the great Paschal Cycle of 532 years and that again multiplied by fifteen, the number of the indiction, there arises the Period of 7980 years,... Now if the Series of the Three minor Cicles be from this present year, extended backward unto precedent Times, the 4713 years before the beginning of our Christian Account, will be found to be that year into which the first year of the Indiction, the first of the Lunar Cicle, and the first of the Solar will fall. Having placed therefore the heads of this Period in the Kalends of January, in that proleptick year, the first of our Christian vulgar account, must be reckoned the 4714 of the Julian Period, which, being divided by will present us with the 4 Roman indiction, the 2 Lunar Cycle, and 10 Solar, which are the Principal Characters of that year. (Ussher, 1658) These quotations are quite long, but only by reading Ussher T s own words can his methods be fully understoo In this passage Ussher deduced that the beginning of the Julian Period must have occurred when the three cycles (Roman indiction, Lunar, and Solar) were all at "zero." Ussher claims that a year of our "forefathers" is the same length as a modern (1650) year with twelve equal months, but with five Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 22

6 <5J , 91 o. "Ahcr tnc fal oi Adam, wasthefirftof almortalmenthatwasbornof a ^Abc^bcm'f^mijrth ere d by h\brother <* -n.rhcfirft born of all man-kind, God gave Eve another Ion 11 his ftcad ; whence ume was called v.»j. when Ai*m hadnowlived ijo years, From v. -cice it is gathered, that betweeu the death of Aktl and the birth of was i eot.icr Ion born to vr; for then hefhoud have bccn'recordcd to have been : vcn her uiftead of him : fo thar whereas now tfv. toceof nun-kind had been continued ;otnc:ermc of n8year«,it ii probable, that the number of men was foencrealcd in the world,that Cain might juftly f(.-ar through the ccailcicncc of his cr me, that Everyman that met him would Jfo day him.[m.f.i4»i Stthnowbeing 105years old,begat a fon,whomhenamed t*«h whichfignifies, the 'arr.entable condition walman-kinforeventhenwastheworfltup ofgodwretchedly ccrriptcd bv-v- ncc of Cam:whence itcame,thatmen werteventhen fod:rinn>iilhcd, t'^/thevu ( - tkdinthetrue woilhipofgod»srereknownbythenameottue childrenof G ^.indtheywhich torfook h;ro, wc: tc-rtcdthe children ofmen, incai'na > i -cfonof Enteh waiborn wsrn h ; sfatherwas 90 yean old,[m.*. 1 ejjjj^j..]' bornwhencainan h'ather lac' lived 70 vean^.f.h.] Jtrtd ' was born < 'nsfatheruw^-«^ i 'ved 'ea^.y.v.i 5.] «* 1 7- JJ44 i Enoch was borik whc.- tather J^rtdhid lived ~Xj. J.v.i 8J t MtthifMJ,wasborn "hen En«hhisfatherhad L-V f-<ycars r L<\5.v.a no 7. 5.] Lumtch was born when bis father MMibrnf/tUb.584 had lived F s 7 yej.% [>.5. VJS.1 Now Addmihcfirft father of all man kindice', when lie had l^ed -ear. As for fcventii from AI*m% God tranflatcd him in an 1 ^int, whiles he was I walkinj' Figure 7. Old Testament Chronology from Ussher's Annales. (Ussher, 1658) additional days being added to each year and six every fourth year to allow for the differences in length between twelve lunar months and the solar year. Ussher then reaches the following conclusion: And I have observed by the continued succession of these years, as they are delivered in holy writ, That the end of the great Nebuchadnezars, and the beginning of Evilmerodachs (his sons) reign, fell out in the 3442 year of the World, but by collation of Chaldean History, and Astronomical Cannon, it fell out in the 186 year Nabonasar, and, as by certain connexion, it must follow in the 562 year before the Christian account, and of the Julian Period, the and from thence I gathered the Creation of the World did fall out upon the 710 year of the Julian Period, by placing its beginning in Autumn; but for as much as the first day of the World began with the evening of the first day of the week, I have observed that the Sunday, which in the year 710 aforesaid, came nearest the Autumnal Equinox... happened upon the 23rd day of the Julian October; from thence concluded, that from the evening preceding, that first day of the Julian year, both the first day of the Creation, and the first motion of time are to be deduce The difficulties of Chronologers... being at last over-passed, I encline to this opinion, that from the evening ushering in the first day of the World, to that midnight which began the first day of the Christian era, there was 4003 years, seventy dayes, and six temporarie howers;... (Ussher, 1658) Thus, Ussher used a combination of astronomical cycles to arrive at the timing of the beginning of the "Julian Period" as being 4714 years before the beginning of the "Christian Account," and then from the events in the Old Testament he deduced that Creation took place in the year 710 of the "Julian Perio" The difference between these two dates is his famous 4004 BC. A curious point emerges from a close analysis of these figures. Ussher has the "zero" point of the "Julian Period" farther back in time than Creation itself; with the Creation of the world happening in the year 710 of the Julian Perio Yet Ussher makes no mention of how these 710 years could exist or even be measured if the sun, the standard reference Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 23 for the measurement of time, was not in existence between the "zero" point or beginning of the Julian Period and the Creation of the world, i.e. the universe, in 710. Ussher's biographer, R. Buick Knox feels that even Ussher himself would not have claimed finality for his estimate of 4004 BC for the time of Creation, but that it would not have varied much from 4000 years. Ussher was aware of the provisional nature of this estimate and how much it depended upon the various textual readings. (Knox, 1967) Thus did, James Ussher, using a combination of astronomical cycles and Old Testament events determine the date and day of Creation. Indirectly, he produced a time as well, but his Creation event occurred in the evening, not at nine o T clock in the morning as is often quote This 9 a.m. time comes from John Lightfoot, Ussher T s contemporary, and it is the time suggested for the creation of Man, not the Worl In 1701, the 4004 BC date of Bishop Ussher was added as a marginal note to the Oxford Press reprint of the English Bible and there it remained in the King James version up to the mid-twentieth century, without any explanation as to its derivation or origin. In recent times this date has once again become a focal point for those who prefer to adhere to a Creationist explanation for the origin of the worl Thus it is important to fully understand how, when, and by whom this 4004 BC date was derive Acknowledgements The author acknowledges the assistance of Michele Hart, student assistant in the History of Science Collections, Cornell University, and Paul Strzempka, Assistant Dean, University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown in verifying the English translation of Ussher T s original Latin text. The photographs used in the article were prepared for publication by Denis Stager, Audio Visual Specialist, Audio Visual Instructional Services, University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown. Ellen Wells, Chief, Special Collections Branch, Smithsonian Institution Libraries gave valuable assistance in locating some of the manuscripts; as did David Corson, History of Science Librarian, History of Science Collections, Cornell University Libraries, Loretta Molitor, Department of Physics, Towson State University, and Linda Tinglan, Registrar, Folger Shakespeare Library. The primary source material used in the preparation of this article came from Cornell University Libraries, Johns Hopkins University Library, and the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C. Ronald Lane Reese of Washington and Lee University gave permission for the use of his photograph of the title and first pages of Annales and his kindness is hereby acknowledge References Cited Dean, D.R., 1981, The age of the earth controversy: Beginnings to Hutton: Annals of Science, v. 38, p Dunbar, C.O., 1960, Historical geology (2nd e): New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Elrington, Charles Richard, 1864, The whole works of the most rev. James Ussher, D.D., Lord Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland: Dublin, Ireland, Hodges, Smith and Company, 17 volumes. Horner, Leonard, 1861, Anniversary address of the president, 15 February 1861: Quarterly Journal of

7 the Geological Society of London, v. 17, p. xxviilxxii. Kenyon, Sir Frederic, 1958, Our Bible and the ancient manuscripts: New York, Harper and Brothers Publishers. Knox, R. Buick, 1967, James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh: Cardiff, Wales, University of Wales Press. Lightfoot, John, 1642, A few, and new observations upon the book of Genesis. The most of them certain, the rest probable, all harmless, strange, and rarely heard of before: London, England, Printed by T. Badger, 20 p. (Reprinted in 1682 by W.R. for Robert Scott, Thomas Basset, John Wright, and Richard Chiswell.) Lightfoot, John, 1644, Harmony of the four evangelists among themselves and the Old Testament, with an explanation of the chiefest difficulties both in language and sense: London, England, Pt. I, Ptn, 1647, Pt m, (Reprinted as a single volume 1658 by G. Dawson, for Andrew Crook and are to be sold at the Sign of The Green Dragon in Pauls Churchyard). Lightfoot, John, 1647, Harmony, chronicle, and order of the Old Testament: London, England, Printed by R. Cotes for J. Clark. Lyell, Charles, 1875, Principles of geology or the modern changes of the earth and its inhabitants considered as illustrative of geology (12th e): London, England, John Murray, 2 volumes. Millar, Ronald, 1972, The piltdown men: London, England, Victor Gollancz Lt Reese, Ronald Lane, Everett, Steven M., and Crawn, Edwin D., 1981, The chronology of Archbishop James Ussher: Sky and Telescope, v. 62, no. 5, p Stephen, Sir Leslie and Lee, Sir Sidney, eds., 1973a, Lightfoot, John ( ), in The Dictionary of national biography founded in 1882 by George Smith: London England, Oxford University Press, v. XI, p ( , reprinted 1973). Stephen, Sir Leslie and Lee, Sir Sidney, eds., 1973b, Ussher, James ( ), in The Dictionary of national biography founded in 1882 by George Smith: London, England, Oxford University Press, v. XX, p ( , reprinted 1973). Ussher, James, 1650, Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti, una cum rerum Asiaticarum et Aegypticarum chronico, a temporis historici principio usque ad Maccobaicorum initia producto: n.p., ex officina J. Flesher and protestantapud J. Crook and J. Baker. (v. II published in 1654) Ussher, James, 1658, The annals of the worl Deduced from the origin of time, and continued to the beginning of the Emperour Vespasians reign, and the totall destruction and abolition of the temple and commonwealth of the Jews. Containing the historie of the Old and New Testament, with that of the Macchabees. Also all the most memorable affairs of Asia and Egypt, and the rise of the empire of the Roman caesars, under C. Julius, and Octavianus. Collected from all history, as well sacred, as prophane and methodically digested by the Most Reverend James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland: n.p., Printed by E. Tyler for J. Crook and G. Bedell, London Englan CREATIONISTS CHANGE THEIR STRATEGY Arthur N. Strahler 1039 Cima Linda Lane Santa Barbara, California Abstract Fundamentalist creationists have succeeded in having a law passed in Louisiana requiring balanced treatment of "creation-science" and "evolution-science" in Louisiana public schools. A similar effort is under way to obtain passage of such laws in other states. Creationists seem to have changed their legislative strategy to sidestep the legal issue of Church and State. Without mentioning God, the Bible, or Divine Creation, they are prepared to introduce in schools "scientific" evidence of the "sudden" and "relatively recent" creation of the universe, solar system, and life on earth. Their most recent gambit is a suggestion that the theory of organic evolution is, in fact, a religious concept and, as such, should be banned from presentation in government-supported educational institutions. Key words: Education science; geology public affairs; philosophy of science. Creationist watchers should take note of an important change in the creationists 1 strategy in securing legislation by states to require teaching of the creationist doctrine in public schools as an alternative theory to naturalistic organic evolution. The Louisiana "Balanced-Treatment" Bill In Louisiana the "Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Act" was passed into law in July It recognizes two Journal of Geological Education, 1982, v. 30, p. 24