62.

if any person should be led to seek for their analogy or meaning in the Greek tongue, and not in the language from whence they proceeded, he would be grievously puzzled. Who would think, when Plato attributed to Socrates this knowledge, that he would make him continually act in contradiction to it? Or that other 2 writers, when this plain truth was acknowledged, should deviate so shamefully that we should in after times be told, that Tarsus, the antient city in Cilicia, was denominated from agros, a foot: that the river Nile signified nus: and that Gader in Spain was Γης δειρα.

The antients, in all their etymologies, were guided solely by the ear: in this they have been implicitly copied by the moderns. Inquire of Heinsius, whence Thebes, that antient city in upper Egypt, was named; and he will tell you from xn, Teba, 63 stetit: or ask the good bishop Cumberland why Nineve was so called? and he will answer, from Schindler, that it was a compound of 64 Nin-Nau, m, a son inhabited. But

62

Suidas, Stephanus, Etymolog. Eustathius, &c.

So Coptus in Egypt, from xOTTEIV.

63 See Callimachus. vol. 2. Spanheim's not. in Hymn. in Del. v. 87. p. 438.

64 Cumberland's Origines. p. 165. so he derives Goshen in the land of Egypt from a shower of rain. See Sanchon. p. 364.

is it credible, or indeed possible, for these cities to have been named from terms so vague, casual, and indeterminate; which seem to have so little relation to the places to which they are appropriated, or to any places at all? The history of the Chaldeans is of great consequence; and one would be glad to know their original. They are properly called Chasdim; and are, very justly, thought to have been the first constituted nation upon earth. It is said of the patriarch Abraham, that he came from the city Ur of the Chasdim. Whence had they their name? The learned Hyde will 65 answer, that it was from Chesed, their ancestor. Who was Chesed? He was the fourth son of Nahor, who lived in Aram, the upper region of Mesopotamia. Is it said in history that he was the father of this people? There is no mention made of it. Is it said that he was ever in Chaldea? No. Is there the least reason to think that he had any acquaintance with that country? We have no grounds to suppose it. Is there any reason to think that this people, mentioned repeatedly as prior to him by ages, were in reality constituted after him? None. What, then, has induced writers to suppose that he was the father of this people? Because Chesed and

65

5 Hyde de Religione veterum Persarum. c. 2. p. 75.

Chasdim have a remote similitude in sound. And is this the whole? Absolutely all that is or can be alleged for this notion. And as the Chasdim are mentioned some ages before the birth of Chesed, some would have the passage to be introduced proleptically; others suppose it an interpolation, and would strike it out of the sacred text: so far does whim get the better of judgment, that even the written word is not safe. The whole history of Chesed is this: About fifty years after the patriarch Abraham had left his brother Nahor at Haran in Aramea, he received intelligence that Nahor had in that interval been blessed with children. 66 It was told Abraham, behold Milcah, she also hath borne children to thy brother Nahor; Huz, Buz, Kemuel, and Chesed: of these Chesed was the fourth.

a word more concerning him.

There occurs not

It is moreover to be observed, that these ety. mologists differ greatly from one another in their conceptions; so that an unexperienced reader knows not whom to follow. Some deduce all from the Hebrew; others call in to their assistance the Arabic and the Coptic, or whatever tongue or dialect makes most for their purpose. The author of the Universal History, speaking of

66 Genesis. c. 22. v. 20.

67 that many

the Moabitish Idol Chemosh, tells us, make it come from the verb won, mashash, to feel: but Dr. Hyde derives it from the Arabic, Khamush, which signifies gnats, (though in the particular dialect of the tribe Hodail) supposing it to have been an astronomical talisman in the figure of a gnat :-and Le Clerc, who takes this idol for the Sun, from Comosha, a root, in the same tongue, signifying to be swift. There is the same variety of sentiment about Silenus, the companion of Bacchus. 68 Bochart derives his name from Silan,

,שילן

, and supposes him to have been the same as Shiloh, the Messias. Sandford makes him to be Balaam, the false prophet. 9 Huetius maintains that he was assuredly Moses. It is not uncommon to find even in the same writer great uncertainty: we have sometimes two, sometimes three, etymologies presented together of the same word: two out of the three must be groundless, and the third not a whit better: otherwise, the author would have given it the preference, and set the other two aside. An example to this purpose we have in the etymology of Ramesses, as it is explained

67 Universal History. vol. 1. b. 1. 68 Bochart. Geograph. Sacra. 1. 1.

p.

286. notes. c. 18. p. 443. Sandford de descensu Christi. 1. 1. §. 21.

See Gale's Court of the Gentiles. vol. 1. b. 2. c. 6. p. 68,

? Huetius. Demonst. p. 138.

in the 70 Hebrew Onomasticum.

-

Ramesses, toni

truum vel exprobratio tineæ; aut malum delens sive dissolvens; vel confractionem dissolvens, aut confractus a tineâ civitas in extremis finibus Ægypti. A similar interpretation is given of Berodach, a king of Babylon. Berodach: creans contritionem, vel electio interitus, aut filius interitus, vel vaporis tui; sive frumentum; vel puritas nubis, vel vaporis tui. Rex Babyloniæ.

It must be acknowledged of Bochart, that the system upon which he has proceeded is the most plausible of any; and he has shewn infinite ingenuity and learning. He every where tries to support his etymologies by some history of the place concerning which he treats. But the misfortune is, that the names of places which seem to be original, and of high antiquity, are too often deduced by him from circumstances of later date; from events in after ages. The histories to which he appeals were probably not known when the country, or island, received its name. He likewise allows himself a great latitude in forming his derivations: for, to make his terms accord, he has recourse, not only to the Phenician

70 Hebræa, Chaldæa, &c. nomina virorum, mulierum, populorum-Antverpiæ, 1565, Plantin.