The latter pas

pare Isa. xxxvi. 11, 13,) and in Neh. xiii. 24. sages follow the usage which arose after the captivity of the ten tribes; for, after that event, the name Judea and Jew was applied to the whole land and nation. In Jeremiah it is commonly used as a general name of the people, and in particular, in xxxiv. 9, it is used as synonymous with Hebrew. The term Hebrew first occurs in the Apocrypha. But there it means the prevalent Aramæan popular language, which, at that time, had taken the place of the old Hebrew. In Josephus, by the term language of the Hebrews, the old Hebrew language is to be understood."

b

a

Although it requires no proof that the Hebrew language received this name because it was the language of the Hebrew nation, yet, since the manner of using and writing this name, since its origin and meaning, appear to be contested, a short explanation on these points will not be out of place."

1. The following remarks may be made on the difference between the name Hebrew and Israelite: -(1.) In the writings of the Hebrews themselves, the former word is chiefly used merely as an antithesis to men of a different race; for example, to distinguish them from the Egyptians, or Philistines, or where one not a Hebrew is introduced as speaking.

(2.) Foreign writers, Greek and Roman, seem to have been acquainted only with this name and that of Jews, but to know

a

̔Εβραϊστί, οι τῇ Ἑβραίδι διαλέκτῳ.

Prologue to Sirach.

C Γλῶσσα τῶν Εβραίων.

₫ See John v. 2, xix. 13; Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2, xxvi. 14; Josephus, Ant. i. 2, et al. See Elias Levita, in Thisbi, voce ; Vitringa ad Isa. xxxvi. 11; Mangey, in Philo, vol. ii. p. 86; and Henke, Museum, vol. ii. P. 638.

The name holy language (7) first occurs in the Targum on Gen. xi. 1, xxxi. 11, 47, and xlv. 12, and Pseudo-Jonathan. By this term it is distinguished from the language of the holy books, in opposition to profane language, i. e. the Chaldee.

", the

The term Assyrian language () is sometimes improperly used for the Hebrew language written in the Assyrian characters. Tr. Megilla, ch. ii. No. 1, vol. ii. p. 392, ed. Surenhusius. Mikne Abraham, fol. 6. Gen. Jakob, fol. 142,

col. 1.

Yet Augusti (Einleit. in A. T. p. 27) seeks a different explanation. "The Arabians were divided into two parties, the surviving and the extinct. Hebrew may, perhaps, mean the language that is extinct. (1778, interiit, Job xxxiv. 20. Ps. cxliv. 4.)"

See Pococke, Spec. Hist. Arab. p. 3.

=

See Lexicon, sub voce . Perhaps 1 Sam. xiii. 3, 7, is the only exception.

nothing of the term Israelites. So Pausanias calls them Hebrews, (rovs Esgatov,) and their land, the country of the Hebrews, (Eẞqaïor zga.) Tacitus and Josephus use this term throughout. This shows there was the same relation between these two contemporary names which we find among many nations: Hebrew is the proper name of the people, by which they were known to foreign nations; Israelite is the patronymic, or genealogical name, which is usually current only among the people themselves."

Here the question arises, whether the name Hebrew was ever used in a wider sense than that of Israelite. It seems this was the case; but the limits of this use cannot be distinctly defined. Abraham is called the Hebrew, (Gen. xiv. 13,) from which it may be inferred that his race was called by the same name. In Gen. x. 2, Shem is called the father of all the sons of Heber -an expression somewhat emphatic. In the New Testament, the term Hebrew means the Syro-Chaldee, in opposition to Greek and Latin; in the Old Testament, it is used in opposition to the Aramaan. In the latter, might not the term Hebrew be used, inasmuch as it embraced, in its widest sense, the Aramæan also? However, the descendants of Abraham, - the Ishmaelites, or Idumæans, or of Heber, for example, the Nahorites and Arabians descended from Joctan, - are never called by this name. Though originally more extensive, the term may have been gradually restricted.

----

2. The genealogical table in the Bible (Gen. x.) refers the origin of the name to Heber, (, "Eßeg,) the founder of the race, and the sons of Heber, (,) or Heber, is used poetically for Hebrews, (,) as if this word were a patronymic from Heber. But the spirit of that entire table, in which names of people, cities, and lands, are personified, leads us to conclude Heber was not an historical, but only a mythical personage, whose name was first formed from that of the people. This was, doubtless, the case with Ion,

a Compare the names of the Hungarians (i. e. strangers) and Magyars; the Germans (war-men) and Dutch, (probably a patronymic from Teut;) the Phonicians and Canaanites; the Kalmucks (lingerers) and Oelots; the Tsherkassen (robbers) and Adige, &c. The primitive name is generally appellative. This fact will serve as a guide hereafter.

Stuhlmann's Hiob. p. 24. Probably there is no difference in the meaning of the terms in 2 Cor. xi. 22, and Phil. iii. 5; the repetition is mere tautology, as it appears from σπέρμα Αβραάμ.

Dorus, and Æolus. The example of the Arabians shows how arbitrarily the Orientals alter these names; for, when they repeat their genealogy, they substitute for Heber, 77, or 7, names which they have abbreviated from 77. It is very difficult to tell what was the true origin of this name; but it may be considered as decided that it was, originally, an appellative. The most natural derivation is from Eber, (, the yonder land,) that is, the country beyond the River Euphrates. Then Hebrews meant, men from the other side — yonderers. The Canaanites might, very properly, have applied this name to the horde that migrated with Abraham, or they may have brought it with them from an earlier time.'

$3.

ORIGIN AND AGE OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.

1. The elder writers upon language, and the theologians, in treating this subject, adhered to the mythical history of Genesis, which says that one universal language prevailed until the building of the tower of Babel, and from this, by the immediate agency of the angry Deity, the various languages of the world, and consequently the Hebrew, proceeded; thus, in a myth full of meaning and importance, concealing a problem which no philosophy has ever solved in a satisfactory manner."

2. Men have gone still further, and permitted themselves to ask the question, What was the original and universal language? Following the opinion of the elder Jews, most writers decided in favor of the Hebrew, and attempted to establish their opinion by several arguments, namely: (1.) The names, before the confusion of tongues, have a genuine Hebrew etymology; for example, D, man,

a See Hottinger, Hist. Orient. p. 38-44.

See Bochart, Phaleg. xi. 14. Hottinger, Thes. Phil. p. 5. Löscher, l. c. p. 53. Walton, Prol. iii. 1. Hirzel, 1. c. p. 4. It has been falsely derived from directly, or from 7, as Augustine will have it, Quæst. in Gen. lib. i. qu. 24. The myth of the confusion of tongues (in Gen. xi.) is analogous to a Greek fable in Philo, De Confusione Linguarum, (p. 251, ed. Colon,) where the origin of the different languages is placed at the end of the golden age, and is ascribed to the anger of Saturn at the ingratitude of men. Previous to this, men and animals spoke the same language, and were mutually intelligible to one another. See the passage from Plato's Politicus, in Bochart, Phaleg. p. 3

breath, vanity, and others. They forgot that these very names might have been formed by the Hebrews, or transformed. (2.) In almost all languages, traces of the Hebrew may be found; this sometimes takes place very naturally, but it is not to be proved by accidental resemblances. (3.) By the historical explanation of particular passages, like Gen. ii. 23.a

3. But if, independently of all mythical views, we attempt to determine something as to the antiquity and origin of the language, we find ourselves completely forsaken by history. In those writings which are proved to be the oldest, we find the language in the same degree of culture and perfection which it commonly attained in other writings. Beyond this we cannot follow it, as we can the Latin and German languages. The degree of grammatical perfection which belongs to it is not small, and presupposes an existence of centuries. When we are inquiring about its antiquity, we must not place the simplicity, the sensuous and poetical character, of the language too high in the estimate; for that simplicity is, for the most part, the characteristic of this whole class of languages; and its sensuous and poetic character is scarcely more important than it usually is in all old original languages. The onomato-poetica are actually less numerous than in the western languages, and less than it might be expected. In the formation of the radicals of three letters, there is a regularity which few languages can show."

b

4. It is more than probable that there was a time when the Hebrew language was more closely united with the cognate dialects; when the law of the triliterals was not yet formed. But this cannot be proved; and still less do our Hebrew writings extend back to that time. Since Aramaisms and Arabisms are found in the book of Job,

a See Onkelos and Jerusalem Targum, on Gen. xi. 1. Josephus, Antiq. i. 4, x. 2. The opinions of the old writers may be found in St. Morini Exercitatt. de Ling. primæva, (1694, 4to. ;) C. A. Bode, Diss. de Ling. prim., (1740, 4to. ;) A. Pfeifferi Opp. p. 689; and Anton, De Ling. primæva, (1800, 4to.)

Herder's Spirit of Hebrew Poetry, vol. i. p. 7, and p. 310, (German ed.) Eichhorn, Einleit. § 10. However, it is not necessary, and not true of every language, that, in its earlier age, it should have been a highly poetic language, since, in the oldest documents, it has come down to the very verge of prose.

The following are some of the onomato-poetica: in, ti, alas; , ah;, io, euge; HIN, FIN, DIN, PN, to sigh, to groan;, to lick; D, ovgisεiv;, turtur, (but the name of animal sounds, for the most part, is not imitated from their actual sound;) p, to laugh; 3, to neigh; Da, to low.

some have availed themselves of the circumstance in order to refer the book to the earliest period; and they have appealed to the confusion of the Greek dialects in the Homeric age. But these Aramaisms and Arabisms do not differ from those which are found in the other poetic passages of the Old Testament, and particularly those which belong to the second period of the language. This argument, then, for the high antiquity of the book, is as untenable as all others."

§ 4.

COUNTRY WHERE IT ORIGINATED. ITS RELATION TO THE

PHOENICIAN LANGUAGE.

Without doubt we are to look to Palestine as the birthplace of the Hebrew language; and obvious appearances unite in supporting the assertion that, with a few alterations, it was the language of the Canaanitish or Phoenician race,' who inhabited Palestine before the immigration of the descendants of Abraham. The latter received this language, carried it to Ægypt, and brought it back with them to Canaan. The following are the most weighty arguments in favor of this conclusion:

1. The Canaanitish names of persons and places are genuine Hebrew, and, for the most part, their etymology can be very easily ascertained; for example, Abimelech, 3, (father of the king;) Melchisedek, 2, (king of righteousness;) Adonibezek, pr, &c. &c. It cannot be objected to this, that perhaps

The statement (Gen. xxxi. 47) that Laban, a man of Mesopotamia, called a place by the Syriac name

which Jacob called by the Hebrew name ,יְגַר יַחֲדוּתָא

3, hill of witness, presupposes that the dialects were then divided as they afterwards were. But it merely proves they were so divided in the writer's time, and he supposed such was the case in the patriarchal age. But the circumstance is not improbable. The Jews, however, think Abraham spoke Aramæan before his migration to Canaan. Liber Cosri, ii. 68. See Preface to Gesenius's Lexicon, translated in the Biblical Repository, vol. iii. p. 1-45. Simonis, Arcanum, p. 140. Igen, De Jobi... Nat. et Virt. p. 18.

: is incontestably the domestic name of the Phenicians, כנעני or, כנען 5

even the Carthaginians were acquainted with it; for Augustine says (Ex. Ep. Rom.) some rustics near Hippo, being asked whence they were, answered, in Punic, Chanani; i. e. they were Canaanites.

с

is read on Phoenician coins. Eckhel, Doct. Num. vol. iv. p. 409. According to Gen. xxxi. 47, an Aramæan dialect is ascribed to them. See above, p. 435, No. 4.