of Aram.

PART I. writers to part the Carduchi from Armenia, might originally be called Getri, from Geter's seating Geter, son himself in these parts. Others have in Ptolemy observed a city of Albania, which borders on Armenia, to be called formerly Getaræ, and a river of the same country to be called Getras. And indeed these names carry in them such an affinity to Geter, as to make it probable that this might be the first settlement of Geter.

* 9. Of the mation of As

shur, son of Shem,

10.

who.

Pass we on now to the nation of Asshur, which lay on eastward to the nation of Aram, and which is by universal consent esteemed to fix itself in the country, called Asshur in the eastern tongues, in the western Assyria, from the founder of this nation. But by Assyria is here to be understood the country, properly and originally so called, that is, the country lying east of the Tigris, and wherein stood the city of Nineveh; and which afterwards was peculiarly distinguished by the name of Adiabene. Which word the Greeks, after their wonted manner, deriving from words of their own language, thought this country was so called as being Adálatos, unpassable, namely, by reason of the many and large rivers running therein. But Ammianus Marcellinus acquainting us, that there are in these parts two rivers, one named by the Easterns Diavas, the other Adiavas; it is likely that this tract took the name of Adiabene from one or both of the said rivers. Bochart observes, that Deva or Dava in the Chaldee tongue signifies a wolf, and Adiava may be derived from another oriental word denoting swift. Whence he supposes these two may be the rivers, called by the Greeks Aúxos, lycus, wolf, and Tópyos, gorgus, swift, or Kampos, aper, boar, a fierce animal.

It is also observable, that Assyria was, by a Belus of the little and usual change of s into t, formerly called Syrians, also Attyria; which is therefore erroneously taken by some to be a distinct country from Adiabene, or Assyria properly and primarily so named. And in like manner that most ancient king of the Assyrians, which is said to have been the son of Zames,

and to have succeeded Ninus, and to have waged CHAP. III war frequently with Caucasus, the son of Japhet, SECT. IIL and to have been worshipped by the Assyrians as their Mars, or God of war, and to have been called Bel, or Baal; this King, I say, is styled, in Suidas and some others, Thuras, corruptly for Atthuras; that is, Asshur, for Asshur in the Chaldee tongue is Atthur, or Atthura. This person is said to be the son of Zames, as being the son or descendant of Shem, and to have succeeded Ni nus, i. e. Nimrod, and to have overcome Caucasus, i. e. Gog or Magog, the son of Japhet; as Bochartus probably enough conjectures. And hence it follows, as the same learned person observes, that if any regard is to be had to the writers who mention this story, then the Belus or Bel of the Assyrians was not Nimrod, but Asshur. And indeed it is not likely, that the Assyrians should have such a reverence for an invader of their nation as Nimrod was; but rather should pay such a religious respect to the founder of their own nation, or to some considerable person descended from him.

of Elam,

That Elam seated himself in the southern tract 11. beyond the Tigris or Euphrates, is beyond dispute, The nation not only from the authority of Scripture, wherein where seatthe inhabitants of the said tract are plainly and ed. frequently denoted by the name of Elam; but also from Heathen writers, wherein we read of a country here called Elymais, and a city of the same name. It is not to be omitted that the name Elam, as many other names of places, is taken sometimes in a stricter sense, wherein it is distinguished from Susiana and the adjoining provinces; sometimes in a larger sense, so as to include Susiana and other adjacent provinces. Hence Pliny and Ptolemy mention the Elymai as a people inhabiting on the Persian Gulf; and hence Daniel the Prophet speaks of Shushan, the chief city of Susiana, as lying in the province of Elam, Dan. viii. 2.

12.

To the lot of Arphaxad is assigned by learned men the more southern part of Mesopotamia, Arphaxad,

Son of

PART I. (where the plain or vale of Shinar lay on the river

Shem, where seated.

Tigris,) together with the country of Eden, and the tract on the east side of the same river, called Arrapachitis, a name plainly derived from Arpachshad, which is the name of Arphaxad in the Hebrew text. That the vale of Shinar, with the country of Eden, was part of the first plantation of Arphaxad, is supposed on these probabilities: 1. That after the Flood Noah returned and settled himself again in these parts, as well knowing the goodness of the soil and pleasantness of the country: which is confirmed by a town here named Zama, from Zam or Shem. 2. That, upon the dispersion of mankind and confusion of tongues, as the primitive or Hebrew tongue was preserved in the family of Arphaxad, so agreeably hereunto this family still continued in the same parts where they then were, together with their grandsires, Noah and Shem. 3. This opinion may be confirmed from Gen. x. 30. And their dwelling was from Mesha, as you go unto Sephar, a mount of the East. For the Mesha here mentioned is probably esteemed to be the same mountain as is before mentioned under the name of Mash or Masius, in the western parts of Mesopotamia. So that if the fore-cited text is to be understood of the descendants of Arphaxad, as is thought by several learned men, and also by the historian Josephus, it will import thus much, that the southern part of Mesopotamia lying on the east of the Mount Mesha, or Masius, was first inhabited by the descendants of Arphaxad; (and accordingly we here find Phalga, a town probably named from Peleg, or Phaleg, settling there ;) and so on eastward, as far as to Sephar, a mount in the East. Now this Mount Sephar is probably thought to be the mountain adjoining to Siphare, a city in Aria, and which lies directly east from Mesha. And though this be a long tract of ground, yet it will be but proportional to the numerous descendants of Arphaxad, especially by Joktan; of which more by and bye. 4. It is the tradition of the ancients,

Eustathius Antiochenus and Eusebius, that Sela CHAP. III. the son of Arphaxad seated himself in Susiana: SECT. III. and agreeably hereto we read in old writers of a town called Sela. But now Susiana, as has been observed Chap. I. did contain part of the country of Eden which adjoined to, or in probability was a part of, the vale of Shinar largely taken; of which more in the following chapter. 5. It is further confirmed, that Arphaxad seated himself in the vale of Shinar; because we find that Terah and Abraham his son, descendants of Arphaxad, came out of those parts, Gen. xi. 31. Ånd Terah took Abraham his son-and went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan. Now it is confessed, I think, by all, that Chaldea comprehended at least a great part of the vale of Shinar; and it is certain it comprehended as much of the country of Eden as lay west of the common channel of the Euphrates and Tigris. And on this passage of Scripture seems to be grounded what Josephus saith of the Chaldeans being called Arphaxadeans, from Arphaxad: whereby he does not mean that the name Chaldeans was derived from the name Arphaxad, as some erroneously understand him; but that those who were now, i. e. in his days called Chaldeans, were originally called Arphaxadeans. I think all these considerationsput together will make it highly probable, if not more, that the first settlement of the nation of Arphaxad was in the parts we assigned them, particularly in the vale of Shinar, as including under it the country of Eden; and not only in the province Arrapachitis, as some seem to imagine.

13.

Having thus seen the first settlement of the descendants of Arphaxad, let us turn our eyes a little of the son upon their after-colonies, particularly those that of Jokten. sprang from Joktan; of whom Moses reckons up no fewer than thirteen sons. And as Moses assigns their habitation to have been from Mesha to Mount Sephar; so in this tract learned men have observed the names of several places, which, by their likeness to the names of Joktan's sons, seem

PART I to tell their respective situations. These countries being remote, and therefore not so well known, or of so near a concern, at least, to the English reader, I shall pass by the rest, and take particular notice but of the country of Ophir, as being mentioned in holy Scripture, and I think the only one therein mentioned among them that were formerly possessed by, or denominated from, the sons of Joktan. And this Chapter being already run out to a great length, I shall say no more of Ophir here, than that it is generally agreed to lie in the East Indies. There are indeed countries mentioned in Scripture under the names of Sheba and Havilah; but these were probably so denominated, not from the two sons of Joktan that were of the same names, but from others; particularly from two sons of Cush, one of the sons of Ham; to whose descendants (there being nothing certain concerning Lud, the remaining son of Sem, but that he did not seat himself in the country of Lesser Asia, called Lydia) I now hasten,

1.

Land of Ham, which

SECTION IV.

Of the first Plantations of the Descendants of

Ham.

HAM, as has been observed, was the youngest of the three sons of Noah; and consequently his offspring made the youngest branch of Noah's posterity; which may primarily be distinguished into four nations, according to the number of the immediate sons of Ham uamed by Moses, viz. Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan. As to the name of Ham himself, we find Egypt twice or thrice denoted by the name of the land of Ham in the book of Psalms; whence it seems probable that