LECTURE THE FIRST;

ON THE

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LANGUAGES.

PART I.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION.-Relation of these Lectures to the Christian Evidences. - Method to be therein followed.Results to be anticipated. ETHNOGRAPHY, or comparative study of languages.-HISTORYFirst period; Search after the primary language; defects in the object and methods.-Second period; Collection of materials; lists of words, and series of Our-Fathers.-Third period; Attempts at arrangement and classification; Leibnitz, Hervas, Catherine II., and Pallas, Adelung and Vater.Dangerous appearance of the study at this period, from the apparent multiplication of independent languages.RESULTS-First; Formation of families, or large groups of languages in close affinity by words and grammatical forms.— Exemplification in the Indo-European, Semitic, and Malayan families.-Second; Progressive reduction of supposed independent languages into connection with the great families; Ossete, Armenian, Celtic.-Review of Sir W. Betham's System; Dr. Prichard; Recapitulation; Concluding Remarks.

WERE it given unto us to contemplate God's works in the visible and in the moral world, not as we now see them, in shreds and little fragments, but as woven together into the great web of universal harmony; could our minds take in each part

thereof, with its general and particular connections, relations, and appliances,-there can be no doubt but religion as established by Him, would appear to enter and fit so completely and so necessarily into the general plan, as that all would be unravelled and destroyed, if by any means it should be withdrawn. And such a view of its interweaving with the whole economy and fabric of nature, would doubtless be the highest order of evidence which could be given us of its truth. But this is the great difference between nature's and man's operation, that she fashioneth and moulds all the parts of her works at once, while he can apply himself only to the elaboration of one single part at a time; and hence it comes, that in all our researches, the successive and partial attention which we are obliged to give to separate evidences or proofs, doth greatly weaken their collective force. For, as the illustrious Bacon hath well remarked, "the harmony of the sciences, that is, when each part supports the other, is, and ought to be, the true and brief way of confutation and suppression of all the smaller sorts of objections; but, on the other hand, if you draw out every axiom, like the sticks of a fagot, one by one, you may easily

*For as when a carver cuts and graves an image, he shapes only that part whereupon he works, and not the rest; but contrariwise, when nature makes a flower or living creature, she engenders and brings forth rudiments of all the parts at once."-Bacon, "De Augm. Scient." 1. vii. p. 360, Trans. Oxf. 1640.

quarrel with them, and bend and break them at your pleasure."*

To the difficulties thus thrown in our way by the limitation of our faculties, prejudices of venerable standing have added much. For ages it has been considered, by many, useless, and almost profane, to attempt any marriage between theology and the other sciences. Some men in their writings, and many in their discourse, go so far as to suppose that they may enjoy a dualism of opinions, holding one set which they believe as Christians, and another whereof they are convinced as philosophers. Such a one will say, that he believes the Scriptures, and all that they contain; but will yet uphold some system of chronology or history which can nowise be reconciled therewith. One does not see how it is possible to make accordance between the Mosaic creation and Cuvier's discoveries; another thinks the history of the dispersion incompatible with the number of dissimilar languages now existing; a third considers it extremely difficult to explain the origin of all mankind from one common parentage. So far, therefore, from considering religion or its science, theology, as entitled to sisterhood with the other sciences, it is supposed to move on a distinct plane, and preserve a perpetual parallelism with them, which prevents them all from clashing, as it deprives them of mutual support. Hence, too, it is

* Bacon, "De Augm. Scient." 1. vii. p. 330.

no wonder that theology should be always considered a study purely professional, and devoid of general interest: and that it should be deemed impossible to invest its researches with those varied charms that attract us to other scientific inquiries.*

Reflections such as these have led me to the attempt whereupon I enter to-day; the attempt, that is, to bring theology somehow into the circle of the other sciences, by showing how beautifully it is illustrated, supported, and adorned by them all; to prove how justly the philosopher should bow to her decisions, with the assurance that his researches will only confirm them; to demonstrate the convergence of truths revealed with truths discovered; and, however imperfectly, to present you with some such picture as Homer hath described upon his hero's shield; of things and movements heavenly, that appertain unto a higher sphere, hemmed round and embellished by the representations of earthlier and homelier pursuits.

My purpose, therefore, in the course of lectures to which I have invited you, is to show the correspondence between the progress of science and the development of the Christian evidences; and

* For a view of the unsatisfactory method by which the French eclectic school attempts at once to separate and reconcile science and revelation, see Damiron, "Essai sur l'Histoire de la Philosophie en France:" Bruxelles, 1829, pp. 471-474; or, Carové, "Der Saint Simonismus und die neuere Philosophie:" Leip. 1831, p. 42.