the building of the tower and city, "therefore is the name of it called Babel, because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth, and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth," Gen. xi. 9.

The primeval language is an inquiry which has excited considerable discussion and controversy. The Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Chaldee, Phoenician, Egyptian, Ethiopic, Greek, Sanscrit, and Chinese, have each had their zealous advocates, but it is evident that the Hebrew and Syriac, which were originally the same, have superior claims. This will appear more evident when we recollect that the names of the alphabetical letters, and the values attached to them in Hebrew and Syriac, have been generally adopted in the other languages, although the characters are in many instances written very dissimilar; and the antiquity of the letters of those two languages, originally one in appearance, is farther deduced from the simplicity of their forms. Many arguments might also be drawn from internal evidence, such as, that words derived from or identical with Hebrew words pervade all known languages, or at least the greater number of them-that all Oriental names of rivers, mountains, cities, persons, and in many cases of animals and plants, are deducible from the Hebrew-and that when Abraham, who is emphatically termed the Hebrew, journeyed throughout Palestine and Egypt, he was every where understood. While thus stating the weight and authority in favour of the Hebrew and Syriac, the following are some of the principal views held by learned men respecting the original language which was then spoken throughout the world, and the manner in which this universal language was confused, and men rendered unintelligible to each other. Le Clerc maintains that there were no new languages formed at the Confusion, but that it was accomplished by creating a misunderstanding and variance among the builders, without any immediate influence on the spoken language, which is evidently at variance with the account

given by the sacred historian. Scaliger thinks that the confusion of tongues was caused by a temporary interruption of their speech, or rather of their meaning, the builders of the tower, though speaking the same language, understanding each other differently. Others, again, are inclined to think that there was a total privation of the original language, and that the builders were obliged to invent new names of things, and indeed a new language, which consequently would be understood only partially, and among distinct parties or families of them. Causabon and Bishop Patrick maintain that the Confusion caused an indistinct recollection of the original language they previously spoke, which made them speak it in a different manner, "so that," says the latter, "by the various inflections, and terminations, and pronunciations of the divers dialects, they could no more understand one another, than they who understand only Latin can understand those who speak French, Italian, or Spanish, though these languages are out of the former. It is probable that each family had its peculiar dialect, or rather the same common dialect, or a way of speaking was given to those families whom God intended to form one colony in the following dispersion." Shuckford alleges that the Confusion was accomplished by degrees, by the invention and introduction of new words in the families of Noah's descendants, and that the differences increased as each of those families divided and subdivided among themselves. Mede and Wotton hold that, by an extraordinary interposition of Divine power, new languages were framed and communicated to different families by a supernatural infusion, which languages are the roots from which all the dialects that are or have been spoken may be easily reduced. Dr Hartley, in his "Observations on Man," vindicates this opinion; but Dr Bryant, in his "Analysis of Ancient Mythology," advances a new theory, both with respect to the confusion of tongues and the dispersion of the builders. He supposes that the

Confusion was only partial, and limited to Babel. He contends that the Hebrew words, which our translators have given, the whole earth, Gen. xi. 1, 8, should be rendered every region, and by the same words in the ninth verse, the whole rcgion or province. The Confusion, he maintains, consisted in a labial failure, so that the builders could not articulate that their speech was thus confounded but not altered-that after their dispersion, they recovered to a certain extent their primeval language and pronunciation, and the language of the earth continued for ages afterwards nearly the same that the interviews recorded in the Scriptures between the Hebrews and neighbouring nations were conducted without interpreters and that the various languages which are in existence sufficiently prove that they are all dialects from the same common origin, their variety being solely the effect of time, place, and circumstances. Such are some of the ingenious arguments advanced by learned men respecting the confusion of tongues occasioned by the building of the Tower of Babel; and without attempting to controvert or to defend any of the pre, ceding arguments, it may be observed, that the great object of the Confusion appears to have been the prevention of the confederacy of those families of Noah's descendants who were engaged in the undertaking, and thus compelling them to spread themselves over the face of the earth, that it might be cultivated and replenished, of the necessity of which Noah had forewarned them, and which they obviously wished to prevent. Whether there was any other bad intention in the erection of this tower, or to what extent, will never be satisfactorily ascertained; it is evident that it was displeasing to the designs of Providence, and was prevented in an extraordinary manner. is probable, as already observed, that the attempt to frustrate the appointed dispersion of mankind was involved in the undertaking, but it does not appear that the confusion of tongues was so much a punishment on this account, as a

proper and necessary measure for giving effect to the intended dispersion and distribution of the human race. If the Confusion was an actual change of language, it is probable that it was accomplished by degrees, in such a manner as to induce the builders to become disspirited in their undertaking, and at length to abandon it, for the alteration was not so great and so fundamental as some writers have maintained. This is proved by the uniformity of the Eastern languages, the similarity of the habits of the people, and the free intercourse which existed in the earliest ages after the Confusion and Dispersion between persons of different countries.

We have no particular or distinct information as to the extent which this remarkable Confusion operated on the languages of men. If there were no more than these nations, or heads of nations, the number of new languages introduced would be five for Shem, four for Ham, and seven for Japheth. The Jews allege there were seventy, because the descendants of the sons of Noah, enumerated in the tenth chapter of the Book of Genesis, amount to that number. It is not necessary to suppose that the confusion of languages was so great as at present, which could not possibly be, on account of the comparative paucity of the inhabitants of the world. It is, however, admitted that the formation of even two new languages or strongly marked dialects for two of the families of Noah, viz. Ham and Japheth, would be sufficient to account for all existing differences; but what these original tongues were is also a point which has excited considerable discussion. Dr Hales thus gives the opinion of Sir William Jones, collected from different volumes of the Asiatic Researches, in which he discovers traces of these primeval languages, corresponding to the three grand aboriginal races, which he calls the Arabic, the Sanscrit, and the Sclavonic:-1. From the Arabic, or Chaldee, spring the dialects used by the Assyrians, Arabs, and Jews. 2. From the Sanscrit, which is radically different

although it has been discountenanced by some writers; but Dr Hales, who strenuously supports it, quotes in proof two very striking passages, the one in Deut. xxxii. 7-9, "Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations; ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee; when the Most High divided the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the Children of Israel." The other passage is Acts xvii. 26, where St Paul, in his celebrated oration to the Athenian philosophers, declares that God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation." Dr Hales also quotes a curious and interesting Armenian tradition given by Albufaragi, which tends to confirm the views which the most of inquirers have entertained as to the allotments which fell to the share of the three brothers. This Armenian tradition states that Noah distributed the habitable globe from north to south between his sons, giving the region of the blacks to Ham, the region of the tawny to Shem, and to Japheth the region of the fair and the ruddy. Albufaragi, it appears, dates the actual or grand division of the earth in the year B.C. 2614, being five hundred and forty-one years after the Flood, and one hundred and ninety-one years after the death of Noah, and in the one hundred and fortieth year of Peleg, in the following order:-" To the sons of Shem was allotted the middle region of the earth, namely, Palestine, Syria, Assyria, Samarra (supposed by some to be Singar or Shinar, and by others a town or district of Babylonian or Chaldean Irac), Babel (or Babylonia), Persia, and Hedjaz (Arabia). To the sons of Ham, Teiman (or Idumea, Jer. xlix. 7), Africa, Nigritia, Egypt, Nubia, Ethiopia, Scindia, and India (or India west and east of the Indus) To the sons of Japheth, Garbia (Northern Europe), Spain, France, the

countries of the Greeks, Sclavonians, Bulgarians, Turks, and Armenians.” The only important difference between this traditionary statement and that which European writers have agreed to consider the most probable, is the assigning of India to Ham, while the European accounts range that country in Shem's division. To give the order of the dispersion more minutely, Japheth, Noah's eldest son, had seven sons, viz. Gomer, whose descendants peopled those parts of Asia Minor which lie upon the Ægean Sea and the Hellespont, northward, containing Phrygia, Pontus, Bithynia, and a great part of Galatia the ancient Galatians, according to Josephus, being called Gomeræi; and the Cimmerii, according to Herodotus, occupied this tract of country; and from these Gomeræi, Cimmerii, or Celts, Camden derives the ancient Britons, who are still called Cymro, or Cymru. The descendants of Gomer thus peopled Great Britain, Germany, France, Spain, and the maritime countries washed by the Mediterranean Sea, which are called the "Isles of the Gentiles" by the sacred historian, Gen. x. 5. Magog, the second son of Japheth, was the father of the Scythians, on the east and north-east of the Euxine or Black Sea. Madai, the third son, peopled Media, and, according to Mede, Macedonia; his descendants were also found stretching into the coun⚫ try north-west of the Black Sea, bordering on Thrace on the one side, and the banks of the Danube on the other. Javan, the fourth son, was the father of the Grecians about Ionia, the Archipelago, and various districts along the coast of the Mediterranean. The descendants of Tubal and Mespech, the fifth and sixth sons of Japheth, first peopled Cappadocia and the north-west countries of the Caspian Sea, and thence migrating over the mountainous range of the Caucasus, colonized Muscovy or Russia. Thrace was peopled by the descendants of Tiras, the seventh son.

Thus far have we traced and located the descendants of Japheth; we now turn to Shem, Noah's second son. Shem had

five sons, Elam, whose descendants peopled Persia and all the country between Media and Mesopotamia; Ashur, or Asshur, the father of the Assyrians; Arphaxad, termed by Josephus the father of the Chaldeans; Lud, who, it is alleged, gave name to the country of Lydia in Asia Minor, near the river Mæander, celebrated for its serpentine and wandering course; and Aram, supposed to have peopled the countries westward of Assyria, including Syria and Mesopotamia. Ham, the youngest son of Noah, had four sons, Cush, Mizr, Phut, and Canaan, whose posterity spread themselves into the several parts of Arabia, over the borders of Edom or Idumea to Midian and Egypt, the Land of Canaan, whence the Phoenicians derived their origin, and the several regions of the immense African peninsula. "Armenia," observes Dr Hales, "the cradle of the human race, was allotted to Japheth by right of primogeniture, and Samarra and Babel to the sons of Shem; the usurpation of these regions therefore by Nimrod, and of Palestine by Canaan, the grandson and son of Ham, was in violation of the Divine decree. Though the migration of primitive families began at this time, B. C. 2614 (Dr Hales here refers to the Armenian tradition formerly quoted), or about 514 years after the Deluge, it was a length of time before they all reached their respective destinations. The seasons, as well as the boundaries (Acts xvii. 26), of their respective settlements were equally the appointment of God; the nearer countries to the original settlement being planted first, and the remoter in succession. These primitive settlements seem to have been scattered and detached from each other according to local convenience. Even so late as the tenth generation after the Flood, in the time of Abraham, there were considerable tracts of land in Palestine unappropriated, on which he and his nephew Lot frequently pastured their cattle without hinderance or molestation."

Having thus glanced at the confusion of tongues which the building of the tower called Babel occasioned, and the gradual

dispersion of mankind throughout the world, of which the Confusion was the cause, we must now turn to the tower itself, which received the name Babel from the extraordinary occurrence which frustrated the projects of those concerned in the undertaking. We have already mentioned that the common accounts make Nimrod, the "mighty hunter," to have been the prime mover in this transaction, though some commentators_there being no limits to ingenious speculation

proceeding on the supposition that Nimrod for some unknown reason relinquished his kingdom in Shinar, and founded another in Assyria, according to the marginal reading of Gen. x. 11, represent this ancient hero in a most favourable light, alleging that, being disgusted with the mad project of the tower of Babel, he withdrew from the country to exonerate himself from the consequences. It is evident from the narrative of the sacred historian, that the adventurers had proceeded to a considerable height in the erection of the tower, for we are told that after God had confused their com mon language, and when symptoms of the breaking up of the confederacy in consequence had appeared, "they left off to build the city," namely, the tower, which was to be the acropolis or citadel of the projected city. The sacred historian does not intimate that what had been erected of the tower sustained any damage at the Confusion and subsequent Dispersion; he simply states that the building was discontinued. He gives us no information as to its precise dimensions in its unfinished state, but the imagination of Oriental and ancient writers has not been wanting to supply this deficiency by fabulous traditions. Some of them pretend that the tower was no less than 10,000 fathoms, or twelve miles high! Even St Jerome alleges, from the testimony of eye-witnesses, who said they had seen and examined the tower or its remains, that it was in his time four miles high. Others, again, make it range from a furlong to five thousand miles in height! Notwithstanding these absurd fables, it is generally