Printed for C. Crownfield; and J. Crownfield, 1-15-48 MEP Holland 12-3-4? 60523 ΤΟ The AUTHOR. SIR, Na late Letter of yours to the Reverend and Learned Dr. Waterland I meet with the following Paffage pag. 38, 39. As to the Story it felf (i. c. of Babel, and the confufion of Languages) one must needs own it to be a strange one 'Tis certain it has never made any great impression on Men of Letters, however pious otherwife and religious: who in tracing the origin and antiquity of the feveral Languages, feldom think it neceffary to run back to Babel, but find the caufe to be grounds ed in Reafon and Nature; in the neceflary mutability of human things; the rife and fall of States and Empires; change of Modes and Customs; which neceffarily introduce a proportionable change in Language. 'Tis from thefe principles, that Men of Learning have in fact demon A I demonftrated the Caufes, and deduc'd the Hiftory of most particular Languages from their fource and origin; not only of those which now. obtain, but of fuch alfo, as tho' once flourishing are now no longer in common use and practice : as the Greek, Latin, Italian, French &c. MANY both of the Antients and Moderns have endeavour'd to prove, that the Hebrew was the first and common Language of all, till in process of time, thro' the influence of the caufes above hinted, all other Languages Sprang out of it, as naturally, as many Shoots from the fame Root, many Branches from the fame Stock. THESE words, as they feem to lie rather in the form of a private and general Hypothefis, than of publick and particular Remarks upon the Dr., I chufe to be the subject of a few Pages, without interpofing in the particular Argument and Difpute between you and your Adverfary, or prefuming to appear profeffedly in Defence of a Person, who, I doubt not, will prove himself perfectly qualified to vindicate the Honour and Authority of Scripture, as well as his own Repu tation. WHEN I first read the Paffage above cited in your Letter, I could not but difcern immediately the artful design and view of it, 1. To give us a hint of your own advancenacnt and depth in Literature; 2dly, To caft a tacit a tacit and diftant Reflection on Divines, for their fuppofed fimplicity, and unacquaintance with the Nature and Original of Languages. 3dly, To fuggeft and infinuate, that all Men of Letters and understanding, who have trac'd the Origin and Antiquity of Languages, have fhewn no regard to the Scripture Hiftory of the Babel-confufion, but proceeded wholly upon Reason and Nature in their Critical Enquiries and Deductions about them. THIS laft Article being exprefs'd with an extraordinary air of affurance, and in terms very full, bold, and didactical, is to me, I confefs, matter of furprize and amazement; tho' not of much trouble and uncafinefs. I have made it often the bufinefs and diverfion of fome Hours to fearch a little into the Origin and Antiquity of Languages, and have accordingly confulted, as far as I have been able, the Criticks of beft note and character upon that subject; but I neither have, nor can obferve, that the Scripture Story of Babel made never any great impression on Men of Letters, but quite the reverfe, as fhall be fhewn by and by. Strange this! that you and I fhould fee, think, and conclude fo differently, upon the fame Men and Things! But to tell you the truth, I am fully perfwaded, that you have not examin'd so far into these matters, as the nature of the thing and fuch fitive affertions might require: and I flatter A 2 po my |