can one explain the existence, in the same country, of two systems of language so radically unlike each other, as the Sanscrit of the Brahmins and the dialects which prevail exclusively in the South of India? If these dialects were the result of one of those changes, to which we know the Sanscrit has not been less exposed than every other tongue which has long existed, we should have to acknowledge, no doubt, that they are posterior to the arrival of the Brahmins in the Dekkan. But these dialects differ from the Sanscrit, both in their words and their grammatical forms; and therefore we must conclude that they are anterior to the introduction of the Sanscrit into the South of India, and history may admit them as unexceptionable witnesses of the existence of a people established of old throughout the greater portion of the Indian peninsula.

These hints have conducted us to the remotest limits to which criticism can proceed without the fear of losing herself. Indeed, if she has the right to interrogate language, when history no longer responds to her inquiries, she must yet renounce the hope of finding among a people any thing anterior to the language which it speaks. But, to attain to this limit, how many researches are to be made and questions to be solved! To explore all the monuments of the Sanscrit literature, to compare them among themselves, to classify them so far as this can be done; then, when it shall be recognized that these monuments are still only those of the nation which has given to India its faith and its laws, and that this nation is not the only one of which the traces are there found, to study the popular idioms, to examine whether they exhibit any affinity with other tongues foreign to the Indian continent; in one word, to join to a knowledge of the Sanscrit that of four or five other dialects, for which an acquaintance with the learned idiom of the Brahmins affords but feeble aid;-such is the series of labours to which he must devote himself, who would compose a history of the literature and philosophy of India, worthy to be ranked among the great historical productions of our epoch. Even were all the details of this plan to be placed in full light by two centuries. of research and labour, it would still be difficult for a single individual to embrace the whole. But when we see scholars like Colebrooke and Wilson, surrounded by all the aids which a long sojourn in India could accumulate, profoundly versed in the knowledge of numerous idioms, men to whom no branch of human knowledge remains unknown, abstain from touching this

magnificent subject, we may affirm with truth, that it surpasses the powers of any single man, and that the time has not yet come when it is permitted to attempt even a sketch. It is not that these learned men, and those upon the continent, Schlegel and Lassen, Bopp and Humboldt, have renounced the hope of ever knowing India, for which their works have already done so much; but all these scholars, to whom historical and philological science will ever be indebted for the most interesting discoveries, have well understood, that it is necessary to advance in this new career at a regular pace. They have wished to apply to the study of India those processes of investigation, which in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries advanced so much the knowledge of classic antiquity; and it must be said to their honour, that, of all the labours of which that country has been the object, those which have been directed in this sure path of criticism, are as yet the only ones which have produced genuine fruit.

As to ourselves, coming after these illustrious men, to profit by their lessons and to be enlightened by their examples, we shall not have the presumption to attempt that which without doubt is impossible, since they have not dared to undertake it. We would recall the instructions of the learned master who has preceded us in this chair; and we would not forget, that if we are all animated by the desire of becoming acquainted with the ancient civilization of the Brahmins, the surest means of arriving at this knowledge, is to remain faithful to the destination of our prescribed course, and consecrate all our exertions to the study of their language. It is then to the study of the Sanscrit tongue, that we are to apply together all that we have of constancy and zeal. Instead of ambitious sketches on the history of literature in India, which must for a long time yet to come remain imperfect, let us analyze the learned idiom in which this original people expressed themselves; let us read the immortal monuments which attest their genius; and thus we may console ourselves, for having renounced for a time the idea of presenting you a picture of the wonders which they created, by the assurance of having contributed to put it in your power to trace for yourselves some of its features. Let me venture however to say, that although this course must be consecrated to philology, we will nevertheless not therefore banish from it the study of facts and ideas. We will not close our eyes on the most brilliant light which has ever dawned upon us from the East; and

we will seek to comprehend the grand spectacle presented to our view. It is India, with its philosophy and its mythic tales, its literature and its laws, that we study in its language. It is more than India, it is a page in the origin of the world, in the primitive history of the human mind, that we essay to decipher together. Think not that we would hold out this noble aim to your efforts, in the vain desire of soliciting for our labours a popularity which they of themselves cannot obtain. We have the profound conviction, that in the same degree as the study of words, if it be possible to present it without that of ideas, is useless and frivolous; so that of words considered as the visible signs of thought, is solid and prolific. There is no genuine philology without philosophy, nor without history. The analysis of the phenomena of language is also a science of observation; and if it be not itself the science of the human mind, it is nevertheless that of the most wonderful faculty by the aid of which the human mind expands and multiplies itself.

ART. V. ON THE STANDING STILL OF THE SUN AND MOON, JOSH. X. 12-15.

From the "Evangelische Kirchenzeitung." Translated from the German by the Editor.*

The passage in question has ever been a prominent mark for the attacks of the enemies of revelation; and recently Bretschneider has several times appealed to it, as a palpable proof of the untenableness of the ancient view respecting the inspiration of the Scriptures. Pious theologians in former times, and still more in recent days, are visibly in embarrassment, how they shall meet these attacks. To point out by a thorough investigation

* This article is taken from the Evang. Kirchenzeitung for Nov. 1832, No. 88. That work is conducted by Prof. Hengstenberg of Berlin, and the article bears evident marks of being from his pen. It is here inserted without note or comment, as presenting the suggestions of a learned and pious man on a very difficult passage of Scripture, without intending to express any opinion on the merits or demerits of the view itself.-ED.

how this may be done,-to show by an impartial examination of the passage, how on the one hand, we need make no dangerous concessions to opposers; nor, on the other, instead of something supernatural, defend what is merely of human invention, and thus at the same time bring suspicion upon the real miracles of Scripture, is the object of the present essay.

We are well aware, that the result at which we have arrived, will from the very outset be an object of suspicion to many. We certainly least of all desire, that it should be eagerly seized on by pious minds, without severe scrutiny. The same process has so often been applied, from a spirit of false concession, in the case of real miracles, especially during the last half of the preceding century, so often, in order to satisfy men, has God been robbed of his own,-that caution is here an imperious duty. We foresee also, that the opposers of revelation will strive to represent our attempt as arising from one and the same cause with the former objectionable course, viz. the embarrassment in which we are placed by an unnatural view of the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. All this, however, cannot restrain us from the execution of our purpose. We have confidence, that the reasons we shall offer and these alone deserve consideration-will convince the well disposed, that they, and not bias, have brought us to this result. We believe, that to speak the truth is at all times timely, and brings forth fruit. We come therefore without fear to the point.

The voluntary surrender of the city Gibeon, was the occasion of the speedy subdual of the whole territory which afterwards fell to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. It hastened the mutual alliance of the kings of this region; of whom the king of Jerusalem, the chief city of the Jebusites, is mentioned as the most powerful. The attack of these allied kings was first directed, not against Israel, but against Gibeon, which had deserted their common cause. Joshua being informed of this, hastened immediately from the camp at Gilgal to the aid of the besieged Gibeonites. He marched with his army by night, a distance of twenty-five or thirty miles, and reached Gibeon early in the morning. This first battle of the Israelites in Palestine, terminated in their favour. The enemy were discomfited, and fled in a southern direction, in order to throw themselves into their strong cities. The first place mentioned to which the Israelites pursued them, is Bethoron. According to 1 Chron. 7:24, there were two cities of this name, Upper and Lower

Bethoron. With this statement coincides the narration before us; it speaks of an 'ascent of Bethoron,' v. 10, and of a 'going down of Bethoron,' v. 11. Probably Upper Bethoron lay on the height, and Lower Bethoron at the foot of the descent. Thence the enemies fled to Azekah and Makkedah, lying south of Bethoron, the first about parallel to Jerusalem and west of it. A destructive hailstorm, which overtook the flying foe, without injury to the pursuing Israelites, made the latter feel that they had won the victory not by their own might, but only in the strength of the Almighty, who had given success to their arms; while it taught the former, that not human injustice, but the judgment of God, was the cause of their misfortune.

14.

After this, the narration proceeds as follows: Josh. X. 12—

"Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel."

We will first exhibit cursorily the different views which have been given of this passage. They may be reduced to four classes.

I. The opinion which has obtained the most supporters in earlier times, is that which takes the passage in its strictly literal sense, viz. that the sun did actually stand still at the command of Joshua, and thus made a double day. The earliest writer in which this view is found, is Jesus Siracides, who says, c. 46: 4, "Was not one day as long as two?" So late a writer also as Buddeus borrows from this view of the passage an argument against the Copernican system! The grounds of this opinion are best exhibited in Buddeus Hist. Ecc. Vet. Test. p. 828 sq. in Calmet, Bibl. Untersuchungen, translated by Mosheim III. p. 1 sq. and in Lilienthal, die gute Sache der Offenbarung, V. p. 154 sq. IX. p. 296 sq.

II. Others follow indeed the literal acceptation, but are inclined to the assumption, that it was not the sun, but the earth that stood still; they assert, at least, that the contrary cannot be proved from the passage before us. So Mosheim in his notes