tainly fome remainders of it would be fhewn us, fince 'tis an undeniable Truth, that the Aramean or Chaldean Dialect was spoken on the East of Euphrates. In short, no tolerable caufe can be affigned, why only Abraham's Family fhould preferve the old Language in Canaan, and propagate it to his Pofterity, and yet the other Children of Peleg in Mefopotamia fhould utterly forget it, and learn a new Dialect. As the Pofterity of Peleg, that fixt their Habitations beyond the Euphrates, had frequent Inter-marriages with theinhabitants of those places, fo likewife the Children of Abraham not only took them Wives out of their Father's Family, as Haac and Jacob did, but also married Canaanitish Women, as is evident by the Example of Jacob's Sons.

The Sacred Writers exprefly tell us, that in the following Ages, on the North and South of Mefopotamia, the Syrian Tangue was spoken, which the Jews did not understand; but we are no where told, that they were ignorant of the Language of their Neighbours the Canaanites. At the fame time I do not deny but that there may be different Dialects in one and the fame Language, as we find by experience in all Modern Tongues, but fill thofe Dialects are understood by all the Neighbours.

When Sennacherib Monarch of Affyria, that is to fay, King not only of the Nations beyond the Tygris, but likewife of the Upper-Mefopo tamia, fent an Ambaffador to Hezekiah King of

Fudab,

Judah, to stir up the People to a Rebellion : Hezekiah's Courtiers thus address themfelves to him, because he talked in Hebrew. Speak, we pray thee, to thy Servants, in the Aramean or Syrian Language, for we understand it, but talk not to us in Hebrew, leaft the People that is upon the Wall fhould hear, 2 Kings 18. 26. It allo appears out of Daniel, Efdras and Nehemiah, that the Chaldean Tongue was spoken at Babylon. Nabuchodonofor, Dan. 1. 4. commands fome Youths to be chofen out of the Jewish Nobility, that were carried to Babylon to be inftructed in the Learning and Language of the Chaldeans. So likewife Jeremiah (peaks of the Chaldeans, Chap. 5. 15. Behold, fays the Lord, I will bring a Nation upon you from afar,O Hosfe of Ifrael, which is a powerful Nation, and an ancient Nation, a Nation whofe Language thou knoweft not, neither understandeft what they fay.

But no where do we find any like this faid of thofe Nations that were fituated between the Mediterranean-Sea and the Jordan. The Dia lects of the neighbouring People were indeed eafie to be diftinguished from the Jewish Tongue, as Nehemiah particularly tells us of that of Afded and fome others, Chap. 13.24.but 'tis no where affirmed, that they were not un derstood by the Jews.

V. Having thus fhewn that Hebrew was neither the Primitive Tongue, nor preserved in the Family of Heber, nor yet Abraham's Mo ther-Tongue, it now remains for me to enquire Cz

where

where it was spoken: To give my own Opinion freely, though it is different from that of feveral Learned Men, who therein agree with the Jews, I fuppofe it was the Language of Canaan, and that the Pofterity of Abraham learnt it between the Mediterranean Sea and the Fordan, but by no means brought it thither out of Chaldæa; neither can I difcover after the feverest Examination, the leaft Abfurdity in this Opinion; for here we have a Chaldean remove himself with his whole Family into another Country, and having paft the Euphrates and Jordan, wanders up and down Canaan for a hundred years, enters into Covenant with the old Inhabitants, acquires a prodigious Wealth among them, marries feveral Concubines, gets Children, lives in mighty Credit and Reputation, and confequently has frequent Converfations with them. Now after all this, Can any one think it strange, that he learnt a Language which has fo great an Affinity with his own Mother-Tongue, and that his whole Family conform'd themselves in their Speech to the Natives of the Place. Add to this, That Ifaac paffed his whole, and Jacob the better part of his Life among them, that the Children of them both were brought up in the fame Country, and had their Wives from thence. So that upon a due Survey of the matter, it had been a downright Miracle if they had still preferved the Chaldean Tongue, fo little reafon have we to wonder, that the Canaanitish Language became familiar to thofe People.

And

And therefore I look upon that Opinion to be ill grounded, which fuppofes that the Ifraelites ípoke a different Language from the People of Canaan. 'Tis certain that Ifaiah plainly calls Hebrew the Language of Canaan, Chap. 19.18. In that day, fays he, there fhall be five Cities in the Land of Egypt which shall speak the lip of Canaan; which is all one as if he had faid, the Language of Canaan. For the word lip, both there, and in Gen.11.1. fignifies Speech, because the Lips are no less serviceable in speaking, than the Tongue it felf.

Nor is this Opinion fupported by bare. Probability, or to be called a Conjecture merely deduced from the Name, for Bochart, in the fecond Book of his Canaan, Chap. 1. has fully demonftrated it to be grounded upon Truth, which we thall lay down before the Reader in a few words, because in fome Particulars we diffent from that admirable Man. His firft and ftrongest Argument to prove the Language of the Canaanites to be the fame with that of the Hebrews, is brought from the Names of Men and Places, which are purely Hebrew. N.Fuller in the fourth Book of his Mifcellanies, Chap. 4.. maintains the contrary Opinion: Though I grant, fays he, all those names to be purely Hebrew, yet I deny that any of them were Canaanitish names, or given by thofe People; I rather believe that the old names that were impofed by the Canaanites, the Primitive Inhabitants of that Country, were afterwards pronounced and expounded by the Hebrews,

C 3

Hebrews, who fucceeded them in that Land, after the Hebrew manner. Which Hypothefis, were it true, no Argument could be formed out of the Antediluvian Names to prove the Antiquity of the Hebrew Language, and yet Fuller would not willingly grant this, nor indeed any of the Patrons of this Opinion. But in truth this is no better than a Chimera, to which the Holy Scriptures give not the leaft Countenance; for though we thould allow that fome of thefe words were difguifed with a Hebrew Sound and Termination, yet who can imagine that all of them were ferved after this manner, and that neither Mofes nor Joshua fhould in one fingle Line inform us, that they changed all the names, before the Ifraelites poffeffed themselves of the Land of Canaan. Now befides that this is altogether Incredible and without Prefident, there are two things that demonftrate it to be abfolutely Falfe. One is, That Mofes and Joshua give us an account of the Alteration made in feveral Names, by which it appears, that this was the particular Cafe of fome few Cities, and not common to them all. Confult Gen. 23. 2. as alfo Numb. 32. 38. and Joshua 15. 13, 14. c. 19. 47. The other is. That not only the names of thofe Cities in the Poffeffion of the Ifraelites are of Hebrew Extraction, but also of the neighbouring places which they had not fubdued, as Gaza, Afdød, Gath, Hekron, Afèalon, which belonged to the Philiftines, Tyrus, Sidon, Sarepta, &t.

The