Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

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 one lip and ed as in several instances in the New אחת ודברים אחדים

one (kind of) words. By the whole earth' is obviously meant the inhabitants of the whole earth, an idiom of very frequent occurrence in Hebrew. Thus Kings, 10. 24, ‘All the earth sought to Solomon, to hear his wisdom.' Gen. 41. 57, And all countries (Heb. 3

[ocr errors]

Testament, where the original term is used and the interpretation avowedly 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 investi

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, ingate with still more precision the exact the highest degree probable, though the historical proofs necessary to demonstrate the position have not been

meaning of the clause before us, on which the true character of the, confusion' here described very much depends.

The

The original word for 'language,' it will distinguished.' Confusion is properly be observed, is O 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 leshon, tongue, and the when a mode of utterance previously sense here given to Elip is not distinct, clear, and intelligible, becomes sustained by more than two or three by any means impeded, thick, stampassages in the whole compass of the mering, or, in a word, confused. There Bible, and those of somewhat doubtful can be no doubt that the Latin words import. In the utterance of words in Balbus, stammerer, and Balbutio, any language the lip is a principal or- stammering, derive their origin from gan. The various niceties of pronun- the Heb. 3 balal, or, by doubling ciation depend in great measure upon the first radical 33 balbal, bilbel, its motions, and if it were intended to from which latter form of the word say that all men not only had a com- comes Babel, closely related to the mon language, but a common mode of English and German babble. pronouncing it, we know not that this Greek BapBapos barbaros (by commucould be more appositely expressed in tation of liquids for Baxßaλos balbalos) Hebrew than by the phrase here ema barbarian, primarily signifying one ployed, that all the earth was of one of a rude or outlandish pronunciation, lip. Such in fact we believe to be the is doubtless to be referred to the same genuine sense of the words; according root. So far therefore as the leading to which sense, however, the existence and legitimate sense of the original of a common language, though necesterms is concerned, we seem to be sarily implied in the circumstance of a abundantly warranted in assigning to common mode of articulation, is not the the phrase the sense proposed. It is primary idea intended to be conveyed. easy to see however that the consequenIf this interpretation be admitted, the confusion of the lip (3) 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 33 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

ces 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. o. 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

words is that of unity of counsel and | mon Jarchi explains the words by saypurpose; that the builders of Babel in ing 'They entered into the same counthe outset of their undertaking not only sel.' A still farther confirmation of this had a common language, but presented sense is drawn from the term (135 the very spectacle of union to which, palag) applied in ch. 10. 25, to this event Paul exhorts the Corinthians, Cor. 1. and of which we have before remarked 10, 'Now I beseech you, brethren, by that it is distinctly paralleled in Ps. 55. the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 10, 'Destroy, O Lord, and divide their that ye all speak the same thing, and tongues;' i. e. distract their counsels. that there be no divisions among you; The view now given of the writer's but that ve be perfectly joined together meaning appears amply accordant with in the same mind and in the same the declared design of heaven in effectjudgment;' and that the confusion con- ing the event. This was to cause a sisted in breaking up this concord and dispersion of the multitudes congregasplitting the multitude into various ted at Babylon; an end which did not contending factions which could no require for its accomplishment the inlonger cooperate together, but were stantaneous formation of new lanobliged to separate and disperse them-guages, but simply such a confusion in selves in different directions over the the utterance of the old, as should natearth; thus bringing about the very urally lead to misapprehension, discord, purpose of heaven which they had con- and division. The dialectic discrepanspired to defeat. In support of this cies, however, thus originating, though interpretation he appeals to the usage perhaps not very great at first, would of the sacred writers in a number of become gradually more and more passages in which this sense of the marked, as men became more widely terms appears to be involved, particu-separated from each other, and by the larly as it respects the latter influence of climate, laws, customs, rewords. The office of words is to ex-ligion, and various other causes, till they press the inward thoughts, feelings, and purposes of the speaker; and to say that a company of men were all of one kind of words seems equivalent to saying that they were all unanimous in their counsels. A somewhat similar mode of diction occurs in other passages. Thus Josh. 9. 2, 'They gathered themselves together to fight with Joshua and with Israel, with one accord 2. As they journeyed from the East. (Heb. with one mouth).' Ex. Heb. 1 in their breakings-up, or 24. 3, 'And all the people answered removings. The term is peculiar, bewith one voice (73 kol ahad, i, e. ing almost exclusively applied to that nnanimously), and said,' &c. So also kind of progress which is made by 1 Kings, 22. 13. This view of the wri- Nomadic hordes as they alternately ter's meaning we cannot but regard as pitch and strike their tents, and slowly highly plausible, and it is one decidedly advance with their flocks and herds favoured by several of the ancient par- from one region to another. The idea aphrasts. Thus the Jerusalem Targum, usually attached to the English term 'And all the inhabitants of the earth' to journey,' implying a more or less were of one language, one discourse, rapid passage from one place to anothand the same counsel. Thus too Solo-er, and that for a set purpose, is alto

finally issued in substantially different languages. As this is the simplest, so it is perhaps the most rational account of the confusion of tongues at Babel, an event in regard to which historically considered, it is probable there will always adhere some points of obscurity to task and to baffle the researches of the learned.

try. And that this was the case in the present instance is the express assertion of the text. They stayed their course in the plains of Shinar. Now the country of Armenia, in some part of which the mountains of Ararat were situated, consists of two principal valleys or plains of inclination, viz. that of the Araxes towards the north and the east, and that of the Euphrates to

gether foreign to the genuine sense of the | the sea, unless for special reasons they original.-Commentators have found had been induced to take up their residifficulty in satisfactorily accounting dence in some suitable intervening counfor the use of the phrase 'from the East' in this connection. As the mountains of Armenia on which the ark is supposed to have rested, are situated to the north of Babylonia, it might have been supposed that the direction said to have been travelled would have been southward instead of westward. To this it has been considered by some sufficient to reply, that Moses may here have spoken of these localities in a gen-wards the south and the west; into one eral manner, in reference to the coun- or the other of which flow all the try in which he wrote; from which as streams of the country. In their deShinar lay to the east, and the moun- scent into the plain country, therefore, tains of Ararat were probably conceived the emigrants must have arrived, soonsomewhat vaguely by him to lie still er or later, on the banks of one of these more remote in the same direction, he two rivers, and they would naturally might have said, without designing to have followed its course downwards, observe strict topographical accuracy, until they reached the point of their that they journeyed from the East. adopted residence. That it was not But we think a still more probable solu- the Araxes on whose banks the compation may be given free from such an ny arrived is clear, the course of that apparent conflict with the letter of the river being not from the east but from text. It is a fact which will scarcely the west; so that by following its be questioned, that, at all times, popu- stream. they would have been led, not lation has extended into every country, into a plain, but into the mountainous in the first instance, along the courses country of Azerbijan, and ere long to of its rivers. The cause of this is the the banks of the Caspian. It would facility of passage, and the ready means seem therefore that the Noachidæ could of subsistence which are afforded by not have done otherwise than reach the banks of the rivers and the country the banks of the Euphrates, and foladjacent. Wherever, in the present low the course of that river downwards; day, newly-discovered countries are and one has only to look at a map of colonized, we observe the population Asia to see that the direction of the and the cultivation of the land extend- Euphrates, that is, of its eastern branch ing into the interior along the lines of the Morad, or eastern Phrat, is for a the rivers. Regarding Noah and his great distance almost directly 'from the sons then in the same light as we east,' from its source to the point where should regard any of their posterity, if it turns abruptly to the southward; placed in like circumstances, we may whence passing through a break in the assume, that they descended from the chain of Mount Maurus, it pours its place where the ark rested into the val-waters into the plains of Mesopotamia. ley-regions below, and following the Viewed in this light the historian's course of some stream which they words are perfectly reconciled with gewould naturally meet with (as a val-ographical verity, even though it be ley generally supposes a stream), they admitted that the sojourners afterwards would in process of time have reached turned, with the course of the river, to

3 And they said one to anoth- | had brick for stone, and slime had er, Go to, let us make brick, and they for mortar. burn them thoroughly. And they

particular locality in that chain will absolutely answer to the above description.

3. Go to. A mere hortatory inter jection equivalent to our idiom 'Come, let us' do so and so. Let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. Heb.

the south-east. Now the Agridagh before mentioned, ch. 8. 4, as is well known, stands in the valley of the Araxes; and is further cut off from all communication with the Euphrates, by an intermediate chain of mountains, and also by a tributary of the former river. Its claims, therefore, to the hon-burn them to a burnour of being regarded as the place where ing. The practical remark of Calvin the ark rested after the flood are far on these words is peculiarly appropriinferior to those of some elevation with- ate. 'Moses would intimate that they in the plain of inclination drained by were not prompted to the work by the the Euphrates. This precise spot it is facilities that offered themselves; but now indeed difficult, if not impossible, that they were disposed to contend with to identify. But that such a situation great and arduous obstacles-a circumwas chosen for its resting-place as was stance that went to enhance the greatbest suited to accomplish the ends ness of the crime. For how could it of the Most High in regard to the fube that they should thus wear and exture settlement of the earth, is an infer-haust themselves in this laborious enence which we cannot well help draw- terprise, unless because they had set ing from the tenor of the whole narra- themselves in a frenzied opposition to tive. It is not difficult to suggest a God? Difficulty often deters us from number of reasons to show that the necessary works; but they, without land of Shinar was the centre stones or mortar, do not scruple to atwhence a thorough and entire distribu- tempt an edifice that should transcend tion of the human race over the face of the clonds! Their example teaches us the whole earth could be most readily to what lengths ambition will urge men and conveniently made; and as the val- who give way to their unhallowed lustley of the Euphrates was the route ings.'-As to the material itself it is which, of all others, was the best suited notorious that stone quarries are and to conduct the founders of post-diluvi- ever have been utterly unknown an society to the place so peculiarly fit- throughout the whole region of Babyted for their subsequent dispersion, we lon while the soil, even to this day, is are warranted in supposing that the remarkably well fitted for making brick stranding of the ark occurred at some and abounds with bitumen, both solid spot in the vicinity of that valley and liquid, to a degree unparalleled in whence the descent was easy and free any other quarter of the globe. 'The from the immense difficulties that must soil of ancient Assyria and Babylon,' have impeded the passage down the says Mr. Keppel, (Travels in the East, declivities of the lofty Agridagh. Some p. 73.) 'consists of a fine clay mixed with part of the range of the Taurus along sand, with which, as the waters of the which the Euphrates runs would seem river retire, the shores are covered. This to include the spot likely to fulfil this compost when dried by the heat of the condition; but only by personal inves- sun, becomes a hard and solid mass tigation can it be determined what land forms the finest materials for the

« AnteriorContinuar »