Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

by that Account there were but three Hundred ninety fix Years between the Flood and Phaleg's Birth. In the other Numbers the Samaritan and the LXX's Copies agree. St. Luke owns the second Cainan (Luke iii. 36.) which fhews that the Computation of the LXX was by the Jews at that Time thought to be juft. We fee then that we have the Accounts of the Samaritans and of the Jews in Ptolemee's Time very nearly agreeing; and both vastly different from that in our Hebrew Bibles. I chufe to adhere to the Computation of the LXX, because it has the Authority of St. Luke to back it. Accordingly therefore instead of one hundred and one Years, which are all that can be allowed by the Hebrew Calculation for the peopling of the World from the Flood to the Difperfion at Babel, we have five hundred and thirty one Years which are amply fufficient for fuch a Purpose. The Defcendents of Japhet might very easily be, and doubtless were numerous enough at that Time to separate themselves to the North and Weft, and those of Shem to fupply that vaft Tract of Land which comprehends Perfia, Chaldæa, Affyria, Arabia, and perhaps ftill farther Eaft. The Chamites might retire into Palestine and Afric. This will folve all Difficulties eafily; and fince Mofes is the only Writer that certainly fixes the Time of this Difperfion, and fhews which Way every Branch of the Noachidae went, and where they fettled; and fince we see in Fact

that

that there are, and have been for three Thoufand Years paft feveral Languages, which entirely differ in their Frame and Make from one another, and yet ftill preserve the original Diftinctions in the main Points entire, through all the various Channels into which they have been derived, we have Reason to thank God that this Relation is preferved. For now we are able to obviate an Objection. which might otherwise have been fpeciously brought against the Newness of the World, as it is delivered down by Mofes, even allowing the oldeft Accounts which the Samaritan and Greek Copies exhibit to us.

I fhould now conclude this long Difcourfe, but that I ought to take Notice of some Objections which our excellent Friend Mr. Reland did me the Honour to fend me, when I fent him a Sketch of my Thoughts fome Years ago, upon this Subject. His Notion is much the fame with Stiernbielmius's, that there were no Tongues formed in Babel; but that either they have all been derived by gradual and imperceptible Alterations from the Hebrew, which he takes for granted was the Language of Noah, or were formed at once by mutual Agreement. And that if we confider what an entire Separation of all Intercourfe; a Disability in fome Nations of ргоnouncing four or five Letters, which are Familiar to other People, by Reafon of the different Difpofition of the Organs of their Speech;

Speech; what different Customs and different Diet will produce, this is not fo much to be wondered at. His Arguments have indeed this Weight with me, that I think it is detefta-' bly unjust to fufpect, much lefs to arraign any Man of Impiety, or of favouring of the PraeAdamites, or of thofe who hold the Eternity of the World, that does not upon this Queftion think as I do. He and Stiernhielmius are both proper Judges; one thoroughly fkilled in the Languages of the North; the other equally verfed in the Idioms of the East. Yet fince neither of them have taken Notice of that upon which in my Judgment the Hinge of the Queftion turns, I cannot yet recede from my own Opinion, though I must own if I find that Mr. Reland does not acquiefce, I fhall be tempted to fear that I am in the Wrong.

1. His firft Objection is taken from the Affinity which the European Tongues have with the Hebrew; which he thinks to be fo great, that (upon a Suppofition of the Hebrew's being the oldeft Language) they muft certainly have taken their Original from it, and not have been miraculoufly formed. Allowing for the Time, the Difference is not greater between them, than what we find between Latin, and the great Dialects French and Italian and Spanifh, which have fprung from it within thefe one Thoufand two Hundred Years.

Now

Now here, Sir, you fee that I have prevented a good deal of this already. My Argument does not depend upon the Difference of Words, but upon the Difference of Grammar between any two Languages; from whence it proceeds, that when any Words are derived from one Language into another, the derived Words are there turned and changed according to the particular Genius of the Language into which they are tranfplanted. I have fhewed, for Inftance, in what Fundamentals the Ilandish and the Greek agree. I can eafily afterwards fuppofe that they might be both derived from one common Mother, which is and perhaps has for many Ages been entirely loft. Still we fee the fame common Marks in both, which I have at large explained. Whereas when an Arabic or Hebrew Word is once brought into any of our Western Tongues, in that Cafe there are not only Letters changed, or taken away, or added; but the tranfplanted Words are inflected, if they are Nouns or Verbs, in fuch a Manner as may best answer to the Grammar of the Language into which they are adopted, which is fundamentally different from the Grammar of that Tongue from whence they were taken. The late excellent Mr. Lhuyd (who published his Archaeologia Britannica, as a Prologue to a much greater Work, which God did not fpare him Life to finish) begins his Work with a Difcourfe which he calls Comparative Etymology; in that

[blocks in formation]

the Grounds and Rules of that Science, with numerous Applications to them all, are clearly and methodically laid down. And when he comes to give Inftances out of Cornish, Welsh, Irish or Aremorican (which are all Dialects of the ancient Celtic) of Words that are demonftrably derived from the Latin, it is furprizing to see how much they are altered, and how odly they are derived from that Language. The facies non omnibus una,

Nec diverfa tamen, qualem decet effe fororum, when applied many Times to the fame Words, as they appear in the different Dialects, is by no Means verified in the Cafe before us. Would any Man that is a Stranger to Inquiries of this Nature, imagine that Ebog, which is Irish for a Bishop, fhould come from Epifcopus; Cinges (in the fame Language Whitfontide) from Pentecofte; Giorno in Italian, from Diurnum; and Carême, Lent, in French, from Quadragefima; Didaco, James, in Spanish, from Jacobus; Hefis, a Shirt, in Welsh, from Camifia; or Povo, People, in Portugueze, from Populus? Q. Chriftina faid once pleafantly of Mr. Menage (who was one of the greatest Masters in this Science that ever wrote) that he knew not only whence every Word came, but whither it would go. Carry, fays Mr. Reland,

t

C before I in Irish, is pronounced like K.

Mr. Menage in his Origines Françoifes, voce Haquenée, detives Alfana, which fignifies a Horfe in Spanish, from

the

« ZurückWeiter »