Greeks called part of that country Palestine. As for the rest, Ludiem, and Enemim, and Labim, who alone inhabited in Libya, and called the country from himself; Nedim, and Pethrosim, and Chesloim, and Cephthorim, we know nothing of them besides their names; for the Ethiopic war, which we shall describe hereafter, was the cause that those cities were overthrown. The sons of Canaan were these: Sidonius, who also built a city of the same name; is called by the Greeks Sidon; Amathus inhabited in Amathine, which is even now called Amathe by the inhabitants, although the Macedonians named it Epiphania, from one of his posterity; Arudeus possessed the island Aradus; Arucus possessed Arce, which is in Libanus. But for the seven others, Chetteus, Jehuseus, Amorreus, Gergeseus, Eudeus, Sineus, Samareus, we have nothing in the sacred books but their names, for the Hebrews overthrew their cities; and their calamities came upon them on the occasion following."

He then gives the reason for the curse upon Canaan, which we omit, and pass on to Shem.

66

Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons, who inhabited the land that began at the Euphrates, and reached to the Indian Ocean. For Elam left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians. Ashur lived at the city Nineveh; and named his subjects Assyrians, who became the most fortunate nation beyond others. Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans. Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks call Syrians: as Laud founded the Laudites, which are now called

Lydians. Of the four sons of Aram, Uz founded Trachonitis and Damascus; this country lies between Palestine and Celesyria. Ul founded Armenia; and Gather the Bactrians; and Mesa the Mesaneans; it is now called Charax Spasini. Sala was the son of Arphaxad; and his son was Heber, from whom they originally called the Jews Hebrews. Heber begat Joctan and Phaleg; he was called Phaleg because he was born at the dispersion of the nations to their several countries; for Phaleg among the Hebrews signifies division. Now Joctan, one of the sons of Heber, had these sons; Elmodad, Saleph, Asermoth, Jera, Adoram, Aizel, Decla, Ebal, Abamiel, Sabeus, Ophir, Euilat, and Jobab. These inhabited from Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Aria, adjoining to it. And this shall suffice concerning the sons of Shem."

We have furnished this long extract to our readers to place before them, in the shortest possible manner, all that can be fairly said upon the subject; for although many writers have written on this subject since Josephus, and have indulged in many ingenious speculations, yet the above extracts are the foundations upon which they have all been built; consequently if they are defective the superstructures must fall with them.

It is evident, from the whole tenor of these extracts, that Josephus had no authority for locating the patriarchs and their immediate descendants, in the particular countries he has appropriated to them, but the single circumstances of a resemblance of names in orthography, or sound. Philosophical

etymology, although it has recently assumed a form and substance entitling it to high consideration, does not yet promise to perform as much for the history of man, as Josephus claims for it, on grounds which are rejected by the more erudite and cautious moderns. It is true that modern philologists promised to unfold "the history of every people" by their researches; yet this was only the promise of immature and inexperienced youth, when everything is full of gay and bright visions of the future, remembered only to be laughed at when age and experience inform them of their true power.

Although we will scarcely assent to the saying of Sir William Jones (than whom there has never been a more competent judge), that philosophical etymology "is commonly fallacious, and which, where it elucidates one fact, obscures a thousand," when applied to the rigid principles of the science of the present day, yet it is certainly applicable to, and was justified by, the very loose and conjectural state of the science prior to his time. If mere sound, or fancied resemblances of any kind, should be taken as guides, how easy would it have been for an ingenious writer, when Josephus wrote, spurred to it by national pride, when all the cultivated languages, and all the barbarous then known, were immediate derivatives from one common root, and bore a close resemblance to each other, to find analogies to answer any purpose he desired to accomplish? It is a remarkable and important truth, not only in the investigation of the accuracy of Josephus, but in the history of man, that all the then

known languages for great distances around ancient Babylon were primitives, resolvable into roots within themselves, and each having a striking affinity for every other. This remark is applicable to the Goths and Celts who inhabited the north between the Black and Caspian Seas, and, probably, before Sesostris' time occupied the northern part of Syria; the Phoenician, Syrian, Phelvi, Sanscrit, Hebrew, Arabian, Egyptian, Abyssinian and the Greek languages. It so happens that although the ancient Hebrew, that which was in use prior to the Babylonish captivity, was, probably, as nearly allied to the primitive Noachian stem, as any other, yet after that event it ceased to be the language of the Jews, except as a learned tongue. The Jews did not speak the pure Hebrew in Josephus's time; but the Chaldee mixed with many Hebraisms. How then could Josephus tell us, from the pronunciation of his "own country language," by the names of cities and rivers, the locations of patriarchs more than two thousand years before his time?

Analogy in sound and orthography, at this time, would be scarcely thought worth mentioning, as proof of any important historical fact, unless they were accompanied by some other circumstances to give them strength and importance. Words may be wholly dissimilar in these respects, in different languages, and yet traceable to the same root; and they may be very similar, or identical, even in the same language, and have different roots and significations. The English language abounds with them; as meet to assemble; meat flesh or food; and mete

measure. Lyre an instrument of music; liar one who speaks falsely. Rite a ceremony; write to use a pen. In these examples the orthography is but slightly altered, and the pronunciation is identical; but the significations and derivations of the words are very different.

But there are other highly important facts to notice, in regard to all the ancient Shemitic and Hamo-Shemitic languages, which exhibit the very unstable condition of the dialects of the period. The alphabets of all of them were destitute of vowels; consequently their books, or manuscripts, consisted of a series of consonants, leaving the vowels to be supplied by the reader. Besides, these consonants were written continua serie, without space between the words, or any vowel points or accents, by which the vowels could be supplied, or the words distinguished. Now although it is acknowledged that, from the time of Moses to the Babylonish captivity, the Hebrew language was remarkably stable, yet after that event it underwent so great a change, that the original Hebrew became a dead language, only known to the learned. To this must be added the frequent practice of using one consonant for another, and of omitting, or abolishing the use of radical letters, which, even in our modern tongues, give to the same words widely different pronunciations and significations, many examples of which are given by Dr. Webster, in some of which the pronunciation is retained, while the sense is altered. Although, therefore, we should be disposed to pay a proper respect to etymological ethnology, yet the