ForsuperbengravingsshowingtheviewofBabelasdevelopedbythetheologicalimagination，seeKircher，TurrisBabel，Amsterdam，1679。FortheLawofWillsandCauses，withdeductionsfromitwellstated，seeBeattieCrozier，CivilizationandProgress，London，1888，pp。112，178，179，273。ForPlato，seethePoliticus，p。272，ed。Stephani，citedinErschandGruber，articleBabylon。Foragoodgeneralstatement，seeBibleMyths，NewYork，1883，chap。iii。ForAristotle’sstrangewantofinterestinanyclassificationofthevarietiesofhumanspeech，seeMaxMuller，LecturesontheScienceofLanguage，London，1864，seriesi，chap。iv，pp。123-125。
　　ButnaturallytheversionofthelegendwhichmostaffectedChristendomwasthatmodificationoftheChaldeanformdevelopedamongtheJewsandembodiedintheirsacredbooks。Toathinkingmaninthesedaysitisveryinstructive。ThecomingdownoftheAlmightyfromheaventoseethetowerandputanendtoitbydispersingitsbuilders，pointstothetimewhenhisdwellingwassupposedtobejustabovethefirmamentorsolidvaultabovetheearth：thetimewhenheexercisedhisbeneficentactivityinsuchactsasopening“thewindowsofheaven“togivedownrainupontheearth；inbringingoutthesuneverydayandhangingupthestarseverynighttogivelighttotheearth；inhurlingcomets，togivewarning；inplacinghisbowinthecloud，togivehope；in，comingdowninthecooloftheeveningtowalkandtalkwiththemanhehadmade；inmakingcoatsofskinsforAdamandEve；inenjoyingtheodouroffleshwhichNoahburnedforhim；ineatingwithAbrahamundertheoaksofMamre；inwrestlingwithJacob；andinwritingwithhisownfingeronthestonetablesforMoses。
　　Socametheanswertothethirdquestionregardinglanguage；andallthreeanswers，embodiedinoursacredbooksandimplantedintheJewishmind，suppliedtotheChristianChurchthegermsofatheologicaldevelopmentofphilology。ThesegermsdevelopedrapidlyinthewarmatmosphereofdevotionandignoranceofnaturallawwhichpervadedtheearlyChurch，andtheregrewagreatorthodoxtheoryoflanguage，whichwasheldthroughoutChristendom，“always，everywhere，andbyall。”fornearlytwothousandyears，andtowhich，untilthepresentcentury，allsciencehasbeenobliged，underpainsandpenalties，toconform。
　　Theredid，indeed，comeintohumanthoughtatanearlyperiodsomesuggestionsofthemodernscientificviewofphilology。
　　Lucretiushadproposedatheory，inadequateindeed，butstillpointingtowardthetruth，asfollows：“Natureimpelledmantotrythevarioussoundsofthetongue，andsostruckoutthenamesofthings，muchinthesamewayastheinabilitytospeakisseeninitsturntodrivechildrentotheuseofgestures。”But，amongtheearlyfathersoftheChurch，theonlyonewhoseemstohavecaughtanechoofthisutterancewasSt。GregoryofNyssa：
　　asarule，alltheothergreatfoundersofChristiantheology，asfarastheyexpressedthemselvesonthesubject，tooktheviewthattheoriginallanguagespokenbytheAlmightyandgivenbyhimtomenwasHebrew，andthatfromthisallotherlanguageswerederivedatthedestructionoftheTowerofBabel。ThisdoctrinewasespeciallyupheldbyOrigen，St。Jerome，andSt。
　　Augustine。Origentaughtthat“thelanguagegivenatthefirstthroughAdam，theHebrew，remainedamongthatportionofmankindwhichwasassignednottoanyangel，butcontinuedtheportionofGodhimself。”St。Augustinedeclaredthat，whentheotherracesweredividedbytheirownpeculiarlanguages，Heber’sfamilypreservedthatlanguagewhichisnotunreasonablybelievedtohavebeenthecommonlanguageoftherace，andthatonthisaccountitwashenceforthcalledHebrew。St。Jeromewrote，“ThewholeofantiquityaffirmsthatHebrew，inwhichtheOldTestamentiswritten，wasthebeginningofallhumanspeech。”
　　AmidsuchgreatauthoritiesastheseevenGregoryofNyssastruggledinvain。Heseemstohavetakenthematterveryearnestly，andtohaveusednotonlyargumentbutridicule。HeinsiststhatGoddoesnotspeakHebrew，andthatthetongueusedbyMoseswasnotevenapuredialectofoneofthelanguagesresultingfrom“theconfusion。”Hemakesmantheinventorofspeech，andresortstoraillery：speakingagainsthisopponentEunomius，hesaysthat，“passinginsilencehisbaseandabjectgarrulity。”hewill“noteafewthingswhicharethrownintothemidstofhisuselessorwordydiscourse，whereherepresentsGodteachingwordsandnamestoourfirstparents，sittingbeforethemlikesomepedagogueorgrammarmaster。”But，naturally，thegreatauthorityofOrigen，Jerome，andAugustineprevailed；theviewsuggestedbyLucretius，andagainbySt。GregoryofNyssa，died，out；and“always，everywhere，andbyall。”intheChurch，thedoctrinewasreceivedthatthelanguagespokenbytheAlmightywasHebrew，——thatitwastaughtbyhimtoAdam，——andthatallotherlanguagesonthefaceoftheearthoriginatedfromitatthedispersionattendingthedestructionoftheTowerofBabel。[414]
　　[414]ForLucretius’sstatement，seetheDeRerumNatura，lib。v，Munro’sedition，withtranslation，Cambridge，1886，vol。iii。p。
　　141。FortheopinionofGregoryofNyssa，seeBenfey，GeschichtederSprachwissenschaftinDeutschland，Munchen，1869，p。179；andforthepassagecited，seeGregoryofNyssainhisContraEunomium，xii，inMigne’sPatr。Graeca，vol。ii，p。1043。ForSt。Jerome，seehisEpistleXVIII，inMigne’sPatr。Lat。，vol。
　　xxii，p。365。ForcitationfromSt。Augustine，seetheCityofGod，Dod’stranslation，Edinburgh，1871，vol。ii，p。122。ForcitationfromOrigen，seehisHomilyXI，citedbyGuichardinprefacetoL’HarmonieEtymologique，Paris，1631，lib。xvi，chap。
　　xi。ForabsolutelyconvincingproofsthattheJewsderivedtheBabelandotherlegendsoftheirsacredbooksfrotheChaldeans，seeGeorgeSmith，ChaldeanAccountofGenesis，passim；butespeciallyforamostcandidthoughsomewhatreluctantsummingup，seep。291。
　　Thisideathrewoutrootsandbranchesineverydirection，andsodevelopedeverintonewandstrongforms。Asallscholarsnowknow，thevowelpointsintheHebrewlanguagewerenotadopteduntilatsomeperiodbetweenthesecondandtenthcenturies；butinthemediaevalChurchtheysooncametobeconsideredaspartofthegreatmiracle，——astheworkoftherighthandoftheAlmighty；andneveruntiltheeighteenthcenturywasthereanydoubtallowedastothedivineoriginoftheserabbinicaladditionstothetext。TohesitateinbelievingthatthesepointsweredottedvirtuallybytheveryhandofGodhimselfcametobeconsideredafearfulheresy。
　　Theseriesofbattlesbetweentheologyandscienceinthefieldofcomparativephilologyopenedjustonthispoint，apparentlysoinsignificant：thedirectdivineinspirationoftherabbinicalpunctuation。ThefirsttoimpugnthisdivineoriginofthesevocalpointsandaccentsappearstohavebeenaSpanishmonk，RaymundusMartinus，inhisPugioFidei，orPoniardoftheFaith，whichheputforthinthethirteenthcentury。Butheandhisdoctrinedisappearedbeneaththewavesoftheorthodoxocean，andapparentlyleftnotrace。Fornearlythreehundredyearslongerthefullsacredtheoryhelditsground；butabouttheopeningofthesixteenthcenturyanotherglimpseofthetruthwasgivenbyaJew，EliasLevita，andthisseemstohavehadsomelittleeffect，atleastinkeepingthegermofscientifictruthalive。
　　TheReformation，withitsrenewaloftheliteralstudyoftheScriptures，anditstransferofallinfallibilityfromtheChurchandthepapacytotheletterofthesacredbooks，intensifiedforatimethedevotionofChristendomtothissacredtheoryoflanguage。ThebeliefwasstronglyheldthatthewritersoftheBibleweremerelypensinthehandofGodDeicalami。{；？}Hencetheconclusionthatnotonlythesensebutthewords，letters，andeventhepunctuationproceededfromtheHolySpirit。OnlyonthisonequestionoftheoriginoftheHebrewpointswasthereanycontroversy，andthiswaxedhot。ItbegantobeespeciallynotedthatthesevowelpointsintheHebrewBibledidnotexistinthesynagoguerolls，werenotmentionedintheTalmud，andseemedunknowntoSt。Jerome；andonthesegroundssomeearnestmenventuredtothinkthemnopartoftheoriginalrevelationtoAdam。Zwingli，somuchbeforemostoftheReformersinotherrespects，wasequallysointhis。WhilenotdoubtingthedivineoriginandpreservationoftheHebrewlanguageasawhole，hedeniedtheantiquityofthevocalpoints，demonstratedtheirunessentialcharacter，andpointedoutthefactthatSt。Jeromemakesnomentionofthem。Hisdenialwaslongtherefugeofthosewhosharedthisheresy。
　　ButthefullorthodoxtheoryremainedestablishedamongthevastmajoritybothofCatholicsandProtestants。TheattitudeoftheformeriswellillustratedintheimposingworkofthecanonMarini，whichappearedatVenicein1593，underthetitleofNoah’sArk：ANewTreasuryoftheSacredTongue。ThehugefoliosbeginwiththedeclarationthattheHebrewtonguewas“divinelyinspiredattheverybeginningoftheworld。”andthedoctrineissteadilymaintainedthatthisdivineinspirationextendednotonlytothelettersbuttothepunctuation。
　　Notbeforetheseventeenthcenturywaswellunderwaydowefindathoroughscholarboldenoughtogainsaythispreposterousdoctrine。ThisnewassailantwasCapellus，ProfessorofHebrewatSaumur；buthedarednotputforthhisargumentinFrance：hewasobligedtopublishitinHolland，andeventheresuchobstacleswerethrowninhiswaythatitwastenyearsbeforehepublishedanothertreatiseofimportance。
　　TheworkofCapelluswasreceivedassettlingthequestionbyverymanyopen-mindedscholars，amongwhomwasHugoGrotius。
　　Butmanytheologiansfeltthisviewtobeablowatthesanctityandintegrityofthesacredtext；andin1648thegreatscholar，JohnBuxtorftheyounger，rosetodefendtheorthodoxcitadel：
　　inhisAnticriticahebroughtallhisstoresofknowledgetoupholdthedoctrinethattherabbinicalpointsandaccentshadbeenjotteddownbytherighthandofGod。
　　Thecontroversywaxedhot：scholarslikeVossandBrianWaltonsupportedCapellus；Wasmuthandmanyothersofnotewereasfierceagainsthim。TheSwissProtestantswereespeciallyviolentontheorthodoxside；theirformulaconsensusof1675
　　declaredthevowelpointstobeinspired，andthreeyearslatertheCalvinistsofGeneva，byaspecialcanon，forbadethatanyministershouldbereceivedintotheirjurisdictionuntilhepubliclyconfessedthattheHebrewtext，asitto-dayexistsintheMasoreticcopies，is，bothastotheconsonantsandvowelpoints，divineandauthentic。
　　WhileinHollandsogreatamanasHugoGrotiussupportedtheviewofCapellus，andwhileinFrancetheeminentCatholicscholarRichardSimon，andmanyothers，CatholicandProtestant，tooksimilargroundagainstthisdivineoriginoftheHebrewpunctuation，therewasarrayedagainstthemabodyapparentlyoverwhelming。InFrance，Bossuet，thegreatesttheologianthatFrancehaseverproduced，didhisbesttocrushSimon。InGermany，Wasmuth，professorfirstatRostockandafterwardatKiel，hurledhisVindiciaeattheinnovators。Yetatthisverymomentthebattlewasclearlywon；theargumentsofCapelluswereirrefragable，and，despitethecommandsofbishops，theoutcriesoftheologians，andthesneeringofcritics，hisapplicationofstrictlyscientificobservationandreasoningcarriedtheday。
　　Yetacasualobserver，longafterthefateofthebattlewasreallysettled，mighthavesupposedthatitwasstillindoubt。
　　Asisnotunusualintheologiccontroversies，attemptsweremadetogalvanizethedeaddoctrineintoanappearanceoflife。
　　FamousamongtheseattemptswasthatmadeaslateasthebeginningoftheeighteenthcenturybytwoBrementheologians，HaseandIken。TheyputforthacompilationintwohugefoliossimultaneouslyatLeydenandAmsterdam，prominentinwhichworkisthetreatiseonTheIntegrityofScripture，byJohannAndreasDanzius，ProfessorofOrientalLanguagesandSeniorMemberofthePhilosophicalFacultyofJena，and，toprefaceit，therewasaformalandfulsomeapprovalbythreeeminentprofessorsoftheologyatLeyden。Withgreatfervourtheauthorpointedoutthat“religionitselfdependsabsolutelyontheinfallibleinspiration，bothverbalandliteral，oftheScripturetext“；andwithimpassionedeloquenceheassailedtheblasphemerswhodaredquestionthedivineoriginoftheHebrewpoints。Butthiswasreallythelastgreateffort。ThatthecasewaslostwasseenbythefactthatDanziusfeltobligedtouseothermissilesthanarguments，andespeciallytocallhisopponentshardnames。FromthisperiodtheoldsacredtheoryastotheoriginoftheHebrewpointsmaybeconsideredasdeadandburied。
　　II。THESACREDTHEORYOFLANGUAGEINITSSECONDFORM。
　　Butthewarwassoontobewagedonawiderandfarmoreimportantfield。TheinspirationoftheHebrewpunctuationhavingbeengivenup，thegreatorthodoxbodyfellbackupontheremainderofthetheory，andintrenchedthismorestronglythanever：thetheorythattheHebrewlanguagewasthefirstofalllanguages——thatwhichwasspokenbytheAlmighty，givenbyhimtoAdam，transmittedthroughNoahtotheworldaftertheDeluge——andthatthe“confusionoftongues“wastheoriginofallotherlanguages。
　　Ingivingaccountofthisnewphaseofthestruggle，itiswelltogobackalittle。FromtheRevivalofLearningandtheReformationhadcometherenewedstudyofHebrewinthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies，andthusthesacreddoctrineregardingtheoriginoftheHebrewlanguagereceivedadditionalauthority。