137 



cannot be deemed translations; as their derivation from 

 the Hebrew is forced and wiredrawn. It follows, then, 

 that they are not of Hebrew origin. We have iio reason 

 to suppose, that Moses was acquainted with the antedilu- 

 vian language: he found those names in his familj'-mc- 

 moirs; and derived them, as he could, from the Hebrew, 

 or from the Arabic, which he well understood. Of such 

 names, our learned Professor mentions four, Cain, Tubal 

 Cain, Noah, and Babel: the true derivation of these, and 

 some others, I shall soon have occasion to mention. Le 

 Clerc thinks, that many of these names were given, not at 

 the time of the births of the Patriarchs, but were rather 

 by-names, derived from some remarkable event, that hap- 

 pened in their time. And, indeed, this is evident, with 

 respect to Phaleg or Peleg; as Moses expressly tells us, he 

 was so called, because, in his time, the earth was divided 

 between the descendants of Noah. Genes, x. 25. 



The second ground, on which the advocates for the He- 

 brew rest its claim, is, that a number of words, of Hebraic 

 origin, are found in many other ancient languages; as the 

 Chaldaic, Syriac, Phoenician, and Persian. These, they 

 think, are remnants of the ancient primeval language; and, 

 since these are also Hebrew, they think that language must 

 also be the Hebrew. But this mixture of Hebrew words, 

 in those languages, is easily accounted for. It is now ge- 

 nerally allowed, that the Phcenician, Canaanitish, and He- 

 brew, were one and the same language. The PhoeniciaHs 

 traded to all nations, and must have left them many 



VOL. X. tt words; 



