574 B I B L IC A L E T H N O G R A P H Y .
“ That part of the map colored deep-red includes all the world known to the inspired
writers of the Old Testament ; and this, with the part colored pale-red, includes all known
to St. Paul and the Evangelists. — As we hâve no evidence that their inspiration extended
to matters of science, and we know that they were ignorant of Astronomy, Geology, Natural
History, Geography, &c. — what evidence is there that they knew anything of the INHABITANTS
of countries unknown to them, viz. : Americans, Chinese, Hindoos, Australians
Polynesians, and other contemporary races?” — (J. C. N. : JBibl. and Phys. Hist, of Man-
New York, 1849; “ Map” and pp. 54-67.)
“ These unhistorical origines of nations are now adverted to, as a prelude to the discussion
of the Xth chapter of Genesis (see Ethnological Journal, No. VI., note, page 254), whereby
it will be demonstrated that, under the personifications of “ Shem, Ham, and Japheth,” their
fifteen sons, and seventy-one grand-children, the Hebrew geographers, whose ken of the
earth’s superficies was even more limited than that of Eratosthenes, about b . c. 240, have
never alluded to, nor intended, Mongolian, Malayan, Polynesian, American, or Nigritian
races.”—<-(G. R. G. : Otia Ægyptiaca ; London, 1849: p. 124, “ note.”)
Five years have since elapsed. Most of the conclusions advanced
by the-authors have been challenged. Whether those conclusions
were based, or not, upon thorough investigation of each department
of the subject, the reader of the present volume is now best qualified
to decide.
PART III.
W Ê m m
was«
Supplement.
BY GEO. K. GLIDDON.
I l l
E S SA Y I.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTRODUCTION TO THE X th CHAPTER OF GENESIS.
“ Scriptura prim urn intelligi debet grammatics antequam possit explicari theologies.”
(L u th e b.)
“ T h e X th C h a p t e r of G-e n e s is — Archaeological Introduction to
its Study ” — is the heading given, in our “ Prospectus,” to Part III.
of this work.
To the generality of readers, educated under convictions that every process calculated
to prohe the historical evidences of the Hebrew Scriptures has heretofore been rigorously
applied to them, an Introduction termed “ archaeological ” may seem, to say the least, superfluous
at the present day— while to not a few persons, the proposed method of examination
may, at first sight, even wear the aspect of presumptuousness. Nevertheless, having
announced the intention, it behooves us to justify it.
In common with other Protestants, since bur earliest childhood, we have been assured
that the Bible is the word of God— and that the inspiration of the writers of both Old and
New Testaments rests upon testimony the most irrefragable. We have also been admonished
in the language of the Apostle (1) to “ search the S c r ip tu r e scou p led with the corroborative
exhortation, (2) “ seek, and ye will find; knock, and it will be opened unto you.”
Thus, on the one hand, asseverations the most positive fortify the inquirer who conscientiously
examines whether the divine revelation of the Bible and the inspiration of its penmen
are “ built upon a r o c k a t the same time that, on the other, the Gospels themselves invite
him to search, seek, and scrutinize.
Supported by such authority, no legitimate objection can be sustained, by Protestants,
against the employment of what we conceive to be the only method through which the historical
validity of a given proposition can be thoroughly tested; nor will logical orthodoxy
contest Vater s axiom “Faith in Christ can set no limits to critical inquiries ,* otherwise he
would hinder the knowledge of Truth.”
(1) The good Tidings according to J o h n v . 39.
(2) The good Tidings according to M a t th ew , v i i . 7 ; c o p ie d i n The good Tidings according to L u k e , x i . 9 .
0 ow S h a u p e : The New Testament, translated from Griesbach’s Text; w h e r e in " -w in ” i s s u b s t i t u t e d fo:
s h a ll ” o f k in g J am e s ’s v e rB ion .
VTe
for the