and thereby confounding that Tongue; or when they met with a Thing which had not a Word in that second Language, or imagin'd Powers or Actions which did not exist, or were not perform'd, for which there could be no Words in a Language fram'd from Things, Powers and Actions, they would fall to coining of Words: And as 'tis visible now, that when they coin'd a Word for a Thing for which there was no Word in their corrupted Languages they did not form a Root, and give the Thing an expressive Name as the Hebrew had, but gave it fome Name, which had no Relation to any Root in their Language. "Tis plain the Greeks, and more especially the Latins had, when they form'd their respective Languages, loft the Knowledge of those Powers, because, if they had understood them they would, as those who spoke the Hebrew did, have us'd Words expressive of them, and fuch as were us'd for other Agents and Actions in their respective Languages, and not have given most of them Nick-names, which have no Relation to any Word in their respective Languages, nor to those in any other that we know of, nor to any visible Action or Power whence the Idea could be taken. By this they confounded the Attributes,

Atrtibutes, and apply'd to the Power of, and invoked one for that which belong'd to another, and so loft the Knowledge of them all. If it be suggested that these Names might be each of a Root, and expressive in some other Languages, and that they were only borrow'd for their Gods; and the Root of each, or any one of them, was not admitted into the Tongue or Language: It would feem as hard to fuggeft this, as to take the Cafe as I have stated it, to borrow a Word for the Name of a God, which they did not understand; and if they did fo, that not one Author should tell us what one of them meant, or where, or from what Language they borrow'd it.

When they were in this State, their Language confounded, and they ignorant of the Things, if they had given exprefsive Names, other than King, Lord, or such general Name to Things, Powers or Actions, which did not exist, or were not poffefs'd of the Attribute, but only in Imagination, those Words would have mifled and confounded the Worshipper or Reader, and have left them in the Dark, as much or more than arbitrary Words did. Thence, when the same Author in these modern Languages historically gives you

you Descriptions of a Power or an Agent and also its Name, or an Epithet, or, &c. if the Word so used be descriptive, 'tis Odds but that it is opposite to, or wide of the Defcription: In arbitrary Names or Words which have no Root, though the Word cannot contradict the Discription, 'tis Odds but that any two Descriptions thwart one another, and the arbitrary Word will not help you to rectify that which is false. If you make a Collection, it cannot be called a Concordance of the Emblems, Epithets or Actions, Prayers to, Praises, or, &c. of any one of the Heathen Gods, one says one Thing, another another; so one destroys the Authority of another, and there will remain nothing: So that in the first Language, if you learn the Words where the Things are understood, the Words express the Things, Powers, Actions, &c. they are used for : In the others, when you have learn'd the Words, you must enquire of those who never understood what an; Thing was, to know what Things, Powers, Actions, &c. they stand for.

The Greek and Latin Poets could not have writ their Accounts of the Gods in the Hebrew Tongue, if they had underfood it perfectly; it was not capable of

being applied to Fables; for if a proper Word had been used for every Agent that would have express'd what the Agent was; and afterwards if they had afcribed any Actions to it, which it was incapable of performing, the one Part of the Sentence would have given the Lie to the other. The Description of their Gods in the Hebrew is perfect and true, though they imagin'd that the Course of Things were determin'd by the Circulation of the Heavens, and so made Observations for those Things which were discoverable, and perhaps for fomething more: They could not go far from the Truth, till they had changed the Names; and as 'twas done together, 'tis hard to determine whether the Confufion in their Language by Writing, &c. or their Defire to imagine, had the greater Hand in giving these arbitrary senseless Names to these Powers, their Gods. For even with the Language they had, if they had understood what Power each of their Gods had, they might have fixed a Word in a Root for each of them, defcriptive of the Species of Power or Action they intended to comprehend under that Attribute; but then they could have attributed nothing else to it; and if they had had a Mind to have given another Attribute

1

Attribute to that Power, it either must have been secondary, and comprehended in the first, or else it would shew a Contradiction, give the Writer the Lie, so as you could neither form a God in the Hebrew Tongue without a Foundation of Truth, that is, without expreffing his Efsence, Substance, Power, or Actions by his Name so you could not affix a Name of Power or Action to any Thing but to fuch Essence, Substance or Things, as were pofsess'd of it. And thơ' the Heathens, who spoke Hebrew, thought they ought to apply divine Service to the Heavens for the Powers in them, and were mistaken in that, the Words are properly apply'd to the Powers, properly, and so were proper Names of Condition, of Action, of Office, and truely, and so a Language of Truth; and the fingle Word, the Name, gave a better Description of the Thing than all the Poets, &c. with all their Numbers of Words in other Languages, could do; much more, are they preferable to the Jingle of infignificant Words, compos'd of Imaginations and Falshoods.

:

The Antients, indeed, before Writing, as fimple Animals or Brute Creatures, had each Species, as 'tis term'd, their Instinct, and peculiar Manner of acting, or haldiVOL. IV. stinct

H