earth's surface which had become the residence of mankind.

But under any view of the subject, one thing may be absolutely asserted; which is, that so much of the earth's surface as was inhabited would, at the least, have been obnoxious to this awful visitation of the Divine vengeance; and hence, if the positions of the countries of Eden and Nod have been correctly determined', we have in the geographical basin of Diarbeker, a country which, under any circumstances, must have been subjected to that visitation. How far beyond the limits of that basin the waters may have reached, must (upon the supposition always that the Flood was local,) have depended upon the extent to which the descendants of Adam had spread: for so far also must the Flood have extended in order to destroy all flesh.'

A powerful argument in favour of the opinion that the Flood was only local is derived from the fact that no fossil remains of man attributable to such a cause have anywhere yet been discovered ; and if the locality which I assign to the residence of mankind before the Flood be correct, it follows that in that neighbourhood alone ought we to expect to find those physical remains of the antediluvian world, the discovery of which has been so long and so earnestly, but hitherto so vainly, expected by the advocates of revealed Truth; and the apparent nonexistence of which has been a cause (and that not 1 See Pages 317, 318.

an inconsiderable one) of doubt, and even of scepticism.

I have in conclusion to repeat that there are many difficulties attending the consideration of the subjects of the Flood and the antediluvian residence of mankind, which I have not attempted to meet: nor indeed are the suggestions contained in the present and foregoing articles of this Appendix offered as absolute explanations of those portions of the Sacred History; but rather in the hope that they may be found to be slight approximations to that full perception of Divine Truth, to which, with the blessing of its Author, we shall, doubtless, ultimately be led.

OF THE GOPHER-WOOD OF THE SCRIPTURES. 331

APPENDIX C.

of the GOPHER-WOOD, OF WHICH NOAH'S ARK WAS CONSTRUCTED'.

IN the fourteenth verse of the sixth chapter of Genesis is recorded the following command of the Almighty to the righteous Noah: "Make thee an ark of gopher-wood (py hatzé-gópher);

rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch [or cover] it within and without with pitch (p bakkópher)."

Much difficulty has existed in determining the true meaning of the expression pyy (hatzé-gópher). In the Babylonian Jewish (Chaldee) Paraphrase it is rendered Dip (kadrós) 'cedar'; in the Septuagint version ξύλα τετράγωνα, 'squared or ' wrought timbers'; in the Vulgate ligna lævigata, planed timbers'; by Bochart it is supposed to be cypress; Avenarius and many other critics deem it to be pine; whilst Parkhurst suggests that gopher

1 This article contains the substance of two papers already published by me in the London and Edinburgh Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, viz. Remarks on Mr. Drummond 'Hay's Observations on the Gopher-wood of the received Version of the Scriptures,' printed in the Number for August 1833, vol. iii. pp. 103-104; and 'Remarks on Mr. Carter's Paper on the Gopher-wood,' inserted in the Number for April 1834, vol. iv. pp. 280 -282.

may be a generic name for such trees as abound with inflammable juices'.

It is not my intention to offer any absolute opinion as to the precise description of wood of which the Ark was constructed; my object being chiefly to explain what appears to be the verbal signification of the word gopher.

On the ground, then, that the interchange betwen the letters and is common in the Hebrew and cognate tongues, owing to their being letters of the same organ, and of nearly the same sound', I consider the word (gópher) to be, in fact, identical with (kópher) which occurs with it in the same verse, and of which the meaning is known to be pitch3.

1 All these authorities are cited in Dr. Rees's Cyclopædia, art. ARK: see also Taylor's Calmet's Dictionary, articles ARK and GOPHER-WOOD. Gesenius in his Heb. Lex., art., translates the expression hatzé-gópher, fir or pine wood; remarking that it is without doubt a species of resinous tree'.

2 See Lee's Heb. Gram. 2nd edit. p. 35, Art. 78.

3 In a paper in the Philosophical Magazine for March 1834, vol. iv. pp. 178-182, entitled 'On the Gopher-wood of the received • Version of the Scriptures. By W. G. Carter, Esq.,' an objection is raised to the usual translation of the word (kópher) by 'pitch', on the ground that the verb (kaphár), from which that word is manifestly derived, although of frequent use in the Hebrew Scriptures in the sense of 'to cover over, atone for, or

expiate,' is nowhere found to possess the particular import of

' to cover or daub with pitch'.

But this reasoning must surely have been adopted too hastily; for the writer of that paper .could never have intended to affirm

OF THE GOPHER-WOOD OF THE SCRIPTURES. 333

Should it be objected, however, that it is scarcely probable that these two letters are thus convertible in the same passage, it is only necessary to adduce an instance of their actual interchange in this very portion of the Scriptural History; namely, in the

vayiscor Yehoudh) וַיִּסְכֹּר יְהוָה בַּעֲדוֹ two passages

nya

bahadó " and the Lord shut up [the Ark] upon

case,

that a derivative word is not to be used in a secondary sense, because the root to which it is to be traced cannot, in every instance, have attached to it the same secondary meaning as that which has been acquired by the derivative itself. Were such really the the use of kaphár and its derivatives in the secondary senses of 'to purge away or pardon' (Ps. lxv. 3.); 'to atone' (Levit. iv.35.); ⚫ to disannul or obliterate' (Isaiah xxviii. 18.); ‘a ransom' (Exod. xxi. 30.); 'a [covered?] bason' (1 Chron. xxviii. 17.)-all of which meanings have plainly a direct reference to the primary signification of the verb 'to cover,'—would be equally erroneous with the employment of the word kópher to designate an article fo common use for covering or overlaying, such as pitch is.

Indeed, if there be any word to which is attached a fixed and unequivocal meaning, it would appear to be the word kópher (Gen. vi. 14.); which, as far as my information extends, is not attempted to be rendered otherwise than by the word 'pitch',—whether vegetable or mineral,—in any version of the Bible; except perhaps in that of Mr. Bellamy, the authority of which I may be allowed peremptorily to dispute. But it is not necessary to depend merely upon the received translations for determining the true signification of this word, for the Arabic, the Chaldee, and the Syriac, are all employed to denote the same substance, 'pitch'. Nor does the proof rest even here; for we also find in the Hebrew Scriptures the word (gophríth) brimstone' (Gen. xix. 24.; Isaiah xxx. 33.)—in Arabic, in Chaldee ', and in Syriac A-which is evidently derived