12 And Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city. 13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim, 14 And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, out of whom came istim,) and Caphtorim. 17 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite, 18 And the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite. and afterwards were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad. 19 i And the border of the CaPhil-naanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest unto Sodom and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha. 15 And Canaan begat Sidon his first-born, and Heth, 16 And the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgasite, h 1 Chron. 1. 12. i ch. 13. 12, 14, 15, 17. & 15. 18-21. Numb. 34. 2-12. Josh. 12. 7, 8. both by the river mentioned Gen. 36. 37. The point is of too little importance to warrant particular investigation, and we leave it, with many other similar questions, inveloped in the darkness of remote antiquity. 12. The same is a great city. Heb. altogether in doubt. Though some uncertainty rests upon its site, yet it is believed to have lain opposite the modern town of Mosul, on the east bank of the Tigris where the villages of Nunia (also called Nebbi Yunes, i. e. the prophet Jonah), Nimrood, and Kalla Nunia (the castle of Nineveh) preserve this is the great city; to the present day the remembrance of which would seem to determine the the most ancient capital of the world. reference to Nineveh instead of Resen. For an account of its primitive great- Precisely the same language is used of ness and its present state, and the re- Nineveh, Jon. 3.2, 'Arise, go unto Ninmarkable manner in which the divine eveh, that great city (nb¬an ¬¬n),' predictions concerning it have been ful- and we learn from v. 3, that it was a filled, see Newton and Keith on the prophecies.—¶ The city Rehoboth. city of three days' journey, that is, of sixty miles in circuit; and it is not unHeb. Rehoboth Ir, which likely that the whole four cities here some following the Lat. Vulg. are dis-mentioned were situated near together posed to render, 'The streets of the and united under one social polity so as city,' i. e. the city of Nineveh. But to in some sense to be denominated one this it is, we think, validly objected, (1.) city. That the proper Heb. expression for 'streets of the city' is not 127 but. (2.) That it would be wholly superfluous to speak of building the streets of a city, apart from the building of the city itself. (3.) That the term 'building,' though very properly spoken of a city, is not applicable to the construction of streets. Michaelis very plausibly suggests that ir is a part of the name of the city, and that it is called Rehoboth Ir to distinguish it from Reho 14. Out of whom came Philistim. From Mizraim, the father of the Egyptians, descended also the Philistines. Their situation was near to that of the Canaanites; but not being of them, their country was not given to Israel. This accounts for their not attempting to take it, though in after times there were frequent wars between them. 15, 16. Canaan begat-Heth, and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, &c. The relation in which the chosen people were destined to stand in after ages to 20 These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations. 21 Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, even to him were children born. 22 The children of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Áram. 23 And the children of Aram; Uz, and Hul, and Gether, and Mash. 24 And Arphaxad begat Salah; and Salah begat Eber. k 1 Chron. 1. 17. 1ch. 11. 12. these nations made it proper for the historian to be more particular in de- great. scribing them and their boundaries. ous. brother of Japheth the The sense is in itself ambiguThe epithet elder (Heb. great) may be grammatically constructed either with Shem or Japheth. The Septuagint version adopts the latter, which is followed in the English; the Latin Vulgate the former. It will we think, be found as a general rule, that where an adjective follows two substantives in a state of construction, it agrees with the former, as in Deut. 11. 7, 21. Shem-the father of all the children of Eber. The account of the posterity of this patriarch is introduced in somewhat of a singular manner. It is mentioned as an appendage to his name, a kind of title of honour that was to go along with it, that he was 'father of all the children of Eber.' But this is doubtless inserted with an eye to the prediction of Noah which we have al-'Your eyes have seen all the great acts ready considered in the notes on the of the Lord (Heb. 3an 17 A preceding chapter. When the sacred the work or doing of Jehovah the great).' writer would describe the line of the But a still more certain guide is afford curse, he calls Ham the father of Ca- ed in other passages exhibiting the naan; and when the line of promise, same form of expression, and pointing he calls Shem the father of all the chil-out degrees of relationship. Thus Judg. dren of Eber, or in other words, of the 1. 13, 'The son of Kenaz, the brother of Hebrews. In both cases the fathers Caleb, the younger (Heb. 8 13 had other sons besides those mention-3),' which comp. with Josh. ed, but the historian following the en- 15. 13, and Num. 13. 2-6, seems plaintail of the blessing and the curse, gives ly intended to imply, that it was not a special prominence to the two oppo- Caleb, but Kenaz, who is designated by sing lines to which they respectively the term 'the younger.' Still more pertained. Some indeed prefer to un- conclusive is the following; Judg. 9. 5, derstand 'Eber' here, not as a proper Jotham, the youngest son of Jerubname, but as an appellative applied to baal (Heb. 1 3 801¬ the Hebrew nation, from the root Jotham, the son of Jerubbaal, the abar, to pass over, to cross, as if the young);' where, although the English Hebrews were so denominated from translation varies, the construction in their passing over the Euphrates in the original is precisely the same as in coming from the East to the land of the present passage. Had a uniform Canaan. But in our note on Gen. 14. mode of rendering been pursued, the 13, we shall endeavour to show that words before us would no doubt have the other is by far the most probable been translated, 'Shem, the elder broderivation of the term.- - The brother of Japhet.' At the same time, ther of Japheth the elder. Heb. though we consider the epither 'elder fields. The implication here is that of a division or dispersion of nations, like that of streams of water from one source, and that as this occurred about the period of Peleg's birth, he was na or 'great' as referring properly to Shem, yet we regard it as pointing not to seniority of age, but to priority in honour; for the evidence of Japheth's being the eldest of the three sons of Noah is too strong to be set aside. Yet if it be ad-med from the event. Thus Josephus ; mitted, as intimated above, that Shem, 'He was called Phaleg, because he was the younger, obtained the birthright, born at the dispersion of the nations to this will account for his being almost their several countries; for Phaleg invariably placed first when the broth among the Hebrews signifies division.' ers are mentioned together. In the It is at the same time worthy of notice present catalogue, it is true, this order that the original term, or the root from is reversed, the reason of which is not which it comes, is applied Ps. 55. 9(10), entirely obvious, unless it be that in renot to a physical but to a moral divisciting the posterity of each, the last ion, and one singularly analogous to place is assigned to Shem as the most that which gave occasion to Phaleg's honourable, whereas in the mention of name; 'Destroy, O Lord, and divide the individuals, as in v. 1, the contrary(3 pallag) their tongues;' i. e. conorder is assumed. After all, if any one found their counsels, destroy their unaprefers the view given in our transla- nimity, and break them into contendtion, he is perhaps occupying grounding factions; the very effect which was quite as strong as that which we have produced at Babel, and to which the taken. The point is one of little mo- dispersion was owing. 'It is good to write the remembrance of God's worthy works, whether of mercy or justice, upon the names of our children.' Trapp. As it cannot well be doubt.. ment. 25. Pcleg, for in his days was the earth divided. The Heb. Peleg comes from the root 3 palag, to divide, and properly signifies division.ed that Peleg was named from this inIt is applied for the most part to the artificial trenches, channels or canals which were common in the East for the purpose of dividing or distributing the water employed in irrigating the cident, though the incident itself is not expressly related till we come to the eleventh chapter, we are thus enabled to fix the date of the remarkable epoch of the confusion of tongues; for as The inspired historian, having frequently intimated in the preceding chapter that the earth was divided and its first settlements made by the sons of Noah' after their tongues,' proceeds, in the present, to inform us of the event to which that diversity of languages and the consequent dispersion of mankind was owing. This was the project of building the city and tower of Babel-a project formed in direct contravention of the designs of heaven in regard to the occupation of the earth at large by the various descendants of Noah. But according to a usage very common with the sacred writers, this event is related out of its proper order, the cause of the dispersion being stated after the dispersion itself. See on Gen. 10. 25, 32. 1. The whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. Heb. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. preserved to us. It appears quite evident that throughout Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Assyria, Syria, Palestine, Arabia, and Ethiopia, there was at some distant period but one language spoken. But this region is admitted to have been the original seat of the post-diluvian inhabitants of the earth. The language there spoken therefore was in all probability the language of Noah, and the language of Noah can scarcely have been any other than that of the antediluvians; and that this was the Hebrew cannot well be doubted if we consider that the names of persons and places mentioned in the early history of the world are as pure Hebrew as the names of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or those of Solomon, and Malachi. Thus Adam, Eve, Cain, Seth, Abel; Eden, Nod, Enoch, &c., are all words of purely Hebraic form, structure, and signification, and there is not the least evidence of their being interpretations, as some have suggested, of primitive terms. Had they been translations, we have reason to think the same method would have been follow of omne lip and ed as in several instances in the New אחת ודברים אחדים one (kind of) words. By the 'whole Testament, where the original term is earth' is obviously meant the inhabit-used and the interpretation avowedly ants of the whole earth, an idiom of very frequent occurrence in Hebrew. Thus 1 Kings, 10. 24, ‘All the earth sought to Solomon, to hear his wisdom.' Gen. 41. 57,And all countries (Heb. 3 all the earth) came into Egypt to Joseph to buy corn.' Comp. 1 Kings 8. 27 with 2 Chron. 6. 18; and Is. 37. 18 with 2 Kings 19 17. That this language was the Hebrew is, we think, in the highest degree probable, though the historical proofs necessary to demonstrate the position have not been subjoined. But Moses gives not the least hint of his translating these terms, nor does he in the whole course | of his history, when speaking of the names of persons, utter a single word from which we can infer the existence of an earlier language. Conceiving this then to be a point not reasonably to be questioned, it remains to investigate with still more precision the exact meaning of the clause before us, on which the true character of the, confusion' here described very much depends. The original word for 'language,' it will distinguished.' Confusion is properly be observed, is П saphah, lip. But the mixture of things which before such it is certain that this is not the usual confusion were by nature distinct. And Scripture term for language. That a lip may be said to be confounded term is 1 leshon, tongue, and the when a mode of utterance previously distinct, clear, and intelligible, becomes by any means impeded, thick, stammering, or, in a word, confused. There can be no doubt that the Latin words Balbus, stammerer, and Balbutio, stammering, derive their origin from the Heb. 33 balal, or, by doubling the first radical 3 balbal, bilbel, from which latter form of the word comes Babel, closely related to the English and German babble. The Greek Bapßapos barbaros (by commutation of liquids for ßaßaxos balbalos) a barbarian, primarily signifying one of a rude or outlandish pronunciation, is doubtless to be referred to the same root. So far therefore as the leading and legitimate sense of the original terms is concerned, we seem to be abundantly warranted in assigning to the phrase the sense proposed. It is easy to see however that the consequences of this kind of confusion would be much the same as if it were a multiplication of new languages. If one should, like the Ephraimites, utter Sibboleth' when he meant 'Shibboleth,' it would of course lead to misunderstanding, dispute, and division; and yet, the original language would remain substantially unaltered, and if it were a written language could probably be as easily read by all parties after the confusion as before. And that this was actually the case, the continued incorrupt integrity and purity of the Hebrew afford we think decisive evidence.-It may be well however in this connection to advert to the opinion of the learned Vitringa on this subject (Observ. Sac. L. I. c. 9.), especially as his preferred interpretation can easily be reconciled or incorporated with that which we have given above. He supposes that the dominant idea conveyed by the sense here given to lip is not sustained by more than two or three passages in the whole compass of the Bible, and those of somewhat doubtful import. In the utterance of words in any language the lip is a principal organ. The various niceties of pronunciation depend in great measure upon its motions, and if it were intended to say that all men not only had a common language, but a common mode of pronouncing it, we know not that this could be more appositely expressed in Hebrew than by the phrase here employed, that all the earth was of one lip. Such in fact we believe to be the genuine sense of the words; according to which sense, however, the existence of a common language, though necessarily implied in the circumstance of a common mode of articulation, is not the primary idea intended to be conveyed. If this interpretation be admitted, the confusion of the lip (33) is the confusion of the pronunciation, and this we may suppose to be the primary import of the words. That this mode of rendering does no violence to the original, will be acknowledged by every Hebrew scholar. For although the mass of interpreters have explained the phrase as implying the origination of different languages, yet it is to be noticed that Moses nowhere else expressly mentions such a fact, nor does the Heb. term balal necessarily denote it. Indeed it may be doubted whether it does not rather imply the reverse. The Jewish writer Philo in speaking of this event says, 'He calls it 'confusion,' whereas if he had designed to indicate the rise of different languages, he would have more aptly called it 'division; for those things which are divided into parts, are not so much confounded as |