Some ascribe to him the project of building Babel; which, considering his enterprising disposition, so far as we can judge of it, from the short narrative of the sacred writer, is not improbable. Others say, that he left the country, because he would not consent to the scheme; which, for the reason we have assigned, we do not think at all likely. And not a few conclude, that he was, at that period, very young.

Having passed over the link of history which connects the deluge with the present subject of discussion; we hasten to the immediate object of our meeting at this time: to consider the fact-THE DESTRUCTION OF BABEL; connected with THE CONFUSION OF LANGUAGE; and THE DISPERSION OF THE PEOPLE; and thence to trace, THE ORIGIN OF NATIONS. We shall aim simply, To illustrate and establish this event; and to deduce from it some considerations adapted to our individual improvement. shall attempt,

We

I. TO ILLUSTRATE, AND TO ESTABLISH, THE EVENT.

In order to which, it will be necessary to consider the several parts of the history, as recorded by Moses: to produce the testimony of

other ancient writers; and to answer some enquiries which may arise from the subject. We shall consider,

I. THE SEVERAL PARTS OF THE HISTORY, AS RECORDED BY MOSES.

V. 1." And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech." Speech is the vehicle of communication, by which one man transmits his thoughts to another: nor shall we burden your attention in tracing it's origin; an enquiry which, we think, would lead us up to God himself. We take it for granted, without wasting the time in frivolous discussion, according to the literal meaning of the express words of Moses, that "the whole earth was of one "language, and of one speech." But it may be expected, that something should be said respect ing the primitive tongue-this universal language spoken by our fathers, before the confusion of speech. In addition to those languages, which are commonly known by the title Oriental, the Armenian, the Celtic, the Coptic, the Greek, the Teutonic, and the Chinese, demand the preference on this point. The Armenian, the Celtic, and the Coptic, come before us laden with the venerable marks of hoary antiquity; and the former builds it's claim upon the resting of the ark on it's mountains. The Greek appeals to it's extent and copious

ness. Some have attempted to derive the He brew itself from the Teutonic. The arguments produced in favour of the Chinese, are principally, the antiquity of that nation: their early acquaintance with the arts and sciences: their separation, in all ages, from all other nations: and the singularity of the language itself; which consists of few words, all monosyllables, and is remarkable for it's simplicity, having no variety of declensions, conjugations, or grammatical rules. These singularities have been deemed strong marks in it's behalf, as the original language: besides the presumption that Noah was the founder of the Chinese nation. Each of the Oriental languages have strenuous supporters: but the palm is more generally awarded to the Syriac. The Jews warmly defend the Hebrew tongue; and refer to the etymologies of the names transmitted to us by Moses. In some instances the sacred historian himself has marked their propriety, and the relation which they bear to the person, or place designed by them: but there are others, not so distinguished, in which no such relation can be traced; and the question to be decided is, whether he has preserved the original terms, or, according to the practice of all ancient writers, accommodated them to the dialect of the language in which he wrote? The most probable

conclusion, from this endless, diversity of opinion, is either that the original language is lost; or that it is spoken under variations which render it equivalent to a new tongue; or, that, even supposing it to exist, it cannot be ascertained.

V. 2. "And it came to pass, as they jour

neyed from the east, that they found a plain in "the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.” The extent and situation of the land of Shinar, is not easily determined. There, the city and tower of Babel were erected. Thither, Nebuchadnezzar carried away the vessels of the temple, to the house of his god: which, in all probability, was the temple of Belus, in Babylon. This confirms the general opinion, that the temple of Belus was erected upon the ruins of the tower of Babel; or, at least, that Babylon stood upon, or near, the spot, where this vast design was projected, and partly executed.; The part of Mesopotamia, chosen by the astronomers, in the time of the Khalifah al Mamum, for measuring the content of a degree of a great circle, was the desert of Senjar; the nature of the experiment required the selection of a large and level country; and this is probably

part of

M

the ancient plain of Shinaar*. Upon the whole, we will venture to call it Chaldea.

A

V. 3 and 4. "And they said one to another, "Go to, let us make brick, and burn them "throughly. And they had brick for stone, and "slime had they for mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top

may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a "name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the "face of the whole earth." It has been ima gined by some, that this elevation was reared in fear of a second deluge: we deem this im probable, from their choice of situation, and because other, and sufficient, motives, are assigned in the history. The celebrated and eloquent Saurin says: "The impressions which "the waters of the deluge had made upon the "imagination of Noah, and of his family, "caused them to live in places the most ele"vated, and the least accessible to inunda"tions. They dwelt upon the mountains of "Armenia, in the neighbourhood of that place "where the ark rested. But an hundred and "forty-four years afterwards; according to the "computation of one of the most celebrated

* Anc. Univ. Hist. vol. I. book i. chap. 2. The reader may find much learned discussion, on all the points under review in this part of the Lecture, in that laborious work.