160 LANG 
much greater numbers would probably be found if both 
languages had come down to us entire. The conftruc- 
tion of the two languages is indeed fomewhat different ; 
but this difference arifes chiefly from the fuperior im¬ 
provement of the Chaldean. While the Hebrew language 
was in a manner llationary, the Chaldean underwent pro- 
greffive improvements; was mellowed by antithefes, ren¬ 
dered fonorous by the difpolition of vocal founds, ac¬ 
quired a copioufnefs by compounds, and a majefty by af¬ 
fixes and prefixes, &c. In procefs of time, however, the 
difference became fo great, that the Ifraelites did not nn- 
derftand the Chaldean language at the era of the Baby- 
lonifli captivity. Thus much the prophet intimates, when 
he promifes the pious Jews protection “ from a fierce peo¬ 
ple ; a people of a deeper fpeech than they could per¬ 
ceive ; cf a (hammering tongue, that they could not un¬ 
derhand.” IJa. xxxiii. 19. 
The priority of the Chaldean tongue is indeed con¬ 
tended for by very learned writers. Camden calls it the 
mother of ail languages 5 and molt of the fathers were of 
the fame opinion. Amira has made a collection of argu¬ 
ments, not inconfiderable, in favour of it; and Myriceus, 
after him, did the fame. Erpenius, in his Oration for the 
Hebrew tongue, thought the argument for it and the 
Chaldean fo equal, that he did not choofe to take upon 
him to determine the queftion. Yet; if we anatomize the 
Hebrew language in their manner, we (hall reduce it to 
very great fimplicity; we lhall confine it to a few names 
of things, perfons, and actions ; we (hall make all its 
words monofyllabies, and give it the true character of an 
original tongue. If, at the fame time, we refleCI on the 
fmall number of radical words in that dialed, we (hall be 
more and more convinced of its originality. 
It has been made a queftion, whether the Hebrew lan¬ 
guage was denominated from Heber the progenitor of 
Abraham, or from a word which in that tongue imports 
ever, beyond. Moll of the Chriftian fathers, prior to St. 
Origen, believed that both the Gentile name Hebrew, and 
the name of the language, were derived from the name of 
the patriarch ; but that learned man imagined, that Abra¬ 
ham was called the Hebrew, not becaufe he was defen¬ 
dant of Heber, but becaule he was a transftuvianus, or 
from beyond the river Euphrates. The learned Bochart has 
drained hard to prove the former pofition ; but to us his 
arguments do not appear decifive. We are rather inclined 
to believe, that Abraham was called Chibri, (Hebrew,) 
from the lituation of the country from which he emi¬ 
grated when he came to the country of Chanaan ; and 
that in procefs of time that word became a Gentile appel¬ 
lation, and was afterwards applied to his pofterity often by 
way of reproach, much in the fame manner as we fay a 
Northlander, a Norman, a Tramontane, &c. for we may ob- 
ferve, in the reading the ftrft book of Samuel, that the Phi- 
liitines always call the Ifraelites Hebrews by way of re¬ 
proach. 
Here we may be indulged an obfervation, namely, that 
Abraham, a Hebrew, lived among the Chaldeans, tra¬ 
velled among the Chanaanites, fojonrned among the Phi- 
lillines, lived fome time in Egypt, and in all appearance 
converfed with all thofe nations without any apparent 
difficulty. This circumftance plainly proves, that all thefe 
nations at that time fpoke nearly the lame language; and 
that the nations had not yet begun to improve their re- 
fpective dialefts, nor to deviate in any great meafure from 
the monofyllabic tongue of the Hebrews. 
The chief excellencies of the Hebrew language are un¬ 
doubtedly its fimplicity, purity, energy, and its fecundity 
of exprelhons and fignifications. In all thefe, notwith- 
ffanding its paucity of words, it excels the vail variety of 
other languages which are its cognate dialers. To thefe 
we may add the fignificancy of the names, both of men 
and brutes ; the nature and properties of the latter of 
which are more clearly and more fully exhibited by their 
names in this than in any other tongue hitherto known. 
Belides, its well authenticated antiquity and the venera- 
U A G E. 
ble tone of its writings furpafs any thing left upon re¬ 
cord in any other dialed! now extant in the world. Thefe 
extraordinary qualities excite our admiration at prefent 
under every diladvantage ; and from this circumftance 
we may infer its incomparable beauty in the age of the 
Jewifti legiflator, and what effects it would naturally pro¬ 
duce, could we know it now as it was fpoken and writ¬ 
ten in the days of David and Solomon. 
As far, however, as we underhand it in its prefent mu¬ 
tilated condition, and are able to judge of its character 
from thole few books that have come down to our time, 
we plainly perceive that its genius is fimple, primitive, 
natural, and exadlly conformable to the character of thofe 
uncultivated patriarchs who ufed it themfelves, and tranf- 
mitted it to their defendants in its native purity and fim¬ 
plicity. Its words are comparatively few, yet concife and 
expreffive; derived from a very fmall number of radicals, 
without the artificial compofition of modern languages. 
No tongue, ancient or modern, can rival it in the happy 
and rich fecundity of its verbs, refulting from the variety 
and fignificancy of its conjugations : which are fo admi¬ 
rably arranged and diverlified, that, by changing a letter 
or two of the primitive, they exprefs the various modes 
of acting, fuffering, motion, reft, See. in fuch a precife 
and fignificant manner, that frequently in one word they 
convey an idea which, in any other language, would re¬ 
quire a tedious paraphrafe. Thefe politions might eafily 
be illultrated by numerous examples; but to the Hebrew 
fcholar thefe would be fuperfluous, and to moll others 
neither interelling nor entertaining. 
To thefe we may add the monoiyllabic tone of the lan¬ 
guage, which, by a few prefixes and affixes, without af¬ 
fecting the radix, varies the fignification almoll at plea- 
fure, while the method of affixing the perfon to the verb 
exhibits the gender of the objeft introduced. In the 
nouns of this language there is no flexion except what is 
neceffary to point out the difference of gender and num¬ 
ber. Its cafes are diftinguifhed by articles, which are 
only fingle letters at the beginning of the word ; the pro« ( 
nouns are only fingle letters affixed ; and the prepofitions 
are of the fame character prefixed to words. Its words 
follow one another in an eafy and natural arrangement, 
without intricacy or tranfpofition, without fufpending 
the attention or involving the fenfe by intricate and arti¬ 
ficial periods. All thefe Itriking and peculiar excellencies 
combined, plainly demonltrate the beauty, the liability, 
and originality, of the Hebrew tongue. Some learned men, 
f : .ys Dr. Sharpe, will have it to be the language fpoken 
by Adam in Paradife, and that the faints will (peak it in 
Heaven ; alleging, that it is fo concife, and yet fo figni¬ 
ficant, fo pathetic, and yet fo free from levity or bombaft, 
as, of all languages, to approach neareit to that of fpirits, 
who need no words for conveying their ideas to each 
other. 
It is to be obferved, that there is no piece in all anti¬ 
quity, written in pure Hebrew, befides the books of the 
Old Teftament; and even fome parts of thofe are in Chal¬ 
dee. But the rabbinnical or modern Hebrew is a very 
different language, being that which is ufed by the rab¬ 
bins, in the writings they have compofed. The bafe or 
body of it is the Hebrew or Chaldee, with divers altera¬ 
tions in the words of thefe two languages, the meanings 
whereof they have confiderably enlarged and extended. 
Abundance of things they have borrowed from the Ara¬ 
bic ; the reft is compofed of words and expreffions 
chiefly from the Greek ; fome from the Latin ; and others 
from the other modern tongues; particularly that fpoken 
in the place where each rabbin lived or wrote. Thus the 
rabbinical Hebrew muff be allowed to be a very copious 
language. Mr. Simon, in his Hilt. Crit. du Vieux Telta- 
ment, obferves, that there is fcarcely any art or fcience, 
but the rabbins have treated thereof in it. They have 
tranflated moll of the ancient philolophers, mathemati¬ 
cians, aftronomers, and phyficians; and have written 
themfelves on molt fubjefts 1 they do not want even ora- 
1 tors 
