DIVISION OF THE EABTH. That aU mankind were originally of one ikmily — spoke but one language, that, in consequence of their being united in a design which accorded not with the views of Providence, the Almighty confoonded their speech, and introduced among them a variety of tongues, which produced a general dispersion, are facts declared by the sacred writers. In Acts xvii, 26, we are told, '* God made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth ; and hath determined the times be- fore appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.** In Gen. x, 25, it is said, in the days of Peleg the e(trih tBcu divided. The idea was, that each nation received its allotted portion of territory firom God. The same view is probably taken in Dent, xxxii, 8, 9 :
, When the Moflt High Mslgned an inheritance to nattons— When He divided the boos of Adam ; He fixed the bounds of peoples. According to the namber of the aoDs of IsrteL For the portion of Jehovah is tiis pec^le — Jacob the lot (cord) of his inheritance.
The object of the sacred historian, in the tenth chap- ter of Genesis, is to fhmish a brie^ but authentic rec- ord of the origin of the principal nations of the earth. In Uie form of a genealogical table, or roll, of the de- scendants of Noah, it contains a view of the pedigree of nations in the then known wodd. As such, it is a record of inestimable value, being the most ancient ethnographic document which we possess. It does not, indeed, afford to us, at this late period of the world, that degree of definite information which it doubtless conveyed in the time of Moses. A proper name is apt to assume a new form every time it is translated into a different language, and often in the same dialtet at diffSsrent periods. It is not, therefore, to be wondered at that many nations and peoples should have lost the names by which they were originally called, or that these names should have become so altered by time, or so distorted in being transferred into other tongues, as to make it difficult to trace their relation to those here given. But, notwithstanding the uncertainty arising fh)m this source, tu more successful results have attended the researches of learned men in this department than could have been anticipated, so that nearly all the leading nations of ancient and modem times can be distinctly traced up to their patriarchial progenitors, recited in the present catalogue. Indeed, the subject of this chapter has been so nearly exhaust- ed by the labors of Bochart, Le Clerc, Wells, Michae- lis. Sir William Jones, Hales, Faber, RosenmttUer, and others, that little is left for future gleaners, until a more minute acquaintance shall be formed with the ' siatio regions by some one who shall be master of the
varions cUalects spoken trmn the Indas t» Oi and fkmnthto Arabic Gulf to the CaspiaaSetL hi sidering this record, it is importaoit to refoaxk.! the names of indioidMals are fbr the laoat pot of the nations descended finom them, jvst aa Mi Israel, though names of single persona, are ska of whole nations. This is evident, not only i« fitct that many of them are in ^Mt plnEal tmmkta.wi those ending in «■», but also from the tenamaai many of them, espiecially those ending in iSe, ba| descriptive of trtbetf and not of indiridask. ti though this chapter is placed he/ore thtt ^e««A.ji in the order of time it properiy bckmgs qflm'k'k the confusion of tongues at Babel, wfaidi was ^ |Bi dpal occasion of tiie dispersion of Bankii>d,sM< course have jyreosdetf that dispersion. ThaskstiJi ther evident from the expression, **aftertlidr1oBfm' implying a diversity of langnagea, wlaA we kon i not exist prior to the confusion of tongacs ■iiiind in the eleventh chapter. But sach transpositiaci ■ common with the sacred writera. 8. Speakiag krv oral terms, it may be said that the three warn dy-*, — Shem, Ham, and Japheth — are ^-r^i^mttA b t:, genealogical chart as the representatiTes cf tk tt* grand divisions of the earth, Asia, Afiiea, aadEcri although not precisely according to the boaadsie^ • modem times. The descendants of Japhett pr^-i Europe and the north-west of Asia ; thoaecf Bsaitt southem quarter of the globe, paiticolarly Afika: m the Shemites, the countries of Central A^ psxtjcur ly those around the Euphrates. In acuaAwM «« this, a tradition has long and extauhn^ ptrwiJi throughout the East, particulariy anwogst ^ i^^ and Persians, that Noah divided the earth sbccc '» three sons. But as this tradition resta apn oe ^ press authority of Scripture, the preenaptkB ii tin:^ arose fh>m some confused recollectioQ or intsqmbsi of Noah's prophecy mentioned in Gen. ix, 25-37. ' J has often been asserted," says Heng8tenberg,"tka& genealogical table in Gen. x cannot be fr«a Km since so extended a knowledge of nations fist Cc ^ yond the geographical horizon of the Moosk » This hypothesis must now be considered as tx^le^ The new discoveries and investigations in Egjpt k^ shown that they maintained even from the ooit* dent times a vigorous commerce with cAm m^ and sometimes with very distant nation*. Bstid merely in general do the inveetigations in 'if^i^ antiquities £svor the belief that Moaea was the ix^ of the account in this tenth chapter of Geaefk *i the Egyptian monuments, tfaoae especially wtecb t^ resent the conquests of the ancient Phazaohi enri* eign nations, not a few namea have bees foaadvtf correspond with thoee contained In the chapter yr us. It must be allowed that fisr more stOl ocslii' effected if our knowledge of hiero^yphics wen sr« veiy imperfect" Admitting M oeee to have bm a writer of the book of Genesis (as is estab&hedb^vt^ known internal and external evideneee), Btm tk«*» no improbability in supposing that, in diawia^ ie9i genealogical table, he may have had aeceas to tit' chives kept by the priests among the Egyptisai. nicians, and other surrounding natJona. He are informed, ^* learned in all the learning of tk tians;" and that this included historical MaA graphic knowledge appears from the fhtgrnestuTl mains of Manetho, Suidioniathon, and Beruv.^ the testimony of Herodotos. For tiw sake of cr^ ness and perspicuity, tiiis ancient ethnograplzx <M may be thrown into the following tabular ftm. M with the most probable explanationa which the 'M of the learned have enabled us to offer.