( (לא) אֵ֣לֶּה בְנֵי־שֵׁ֔ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לִלְשֹׁנֹתָ֑ם בְּאַרְצֹתָ֖ם לְגוֹיֵהֶֽם׃ (לב) אֵ֣לֶּה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֧ת בְּנֵי־נֹ֛חַ לְתוֹלְדֹתָ֖ם בְּגוֹיֵהֶ֑ם וּמֵאֵ֜לֶּה נִפְרְד֧וּ הַגּוֹיִ֛ם בָּאָ֖רֶץ אַחַ֥ר הַמַּבּֽוּל׃ (פ)
(31) These are the descendants of Shem according to their clans and languages, by their lands, according to their nations. (32) These are the groupings of Noah’s descendants, according to their origins, by their nations; and from these the nations branched out over the earth after the Flood.
The peoples listed amount precisely to 70, excluding Nimrod, who is an individual. There are 14 Japhethites, 30 Hamites, and 26 Shemites. The figure 70, even if not explicitly given, can hardly be fortuitous. The mere recognition in verse 5 of the existence of additional, unnamed “maritime nations” lends added significance to the enumeration as being deliberately chosen. In the biblical world, the number 70 is “typological”; that is, it is used for rhetorical effect to evoke the idea of totality, of comprehensiveness on a large scale, is opposed to the use of seven on a smaller scale. Thus, according to Genesis 46:27, the entire household of Jacob that went down to Egypt comprised 70 souls. The representative body of the entire community of Israel in the wilderness consisted of 70 elders, as recorded in Exodus 24:9 and Numbers 11:24; and the prophet Ezekiel, in 8:11, uses the same figure at the end of the period of the monarchy. The peoples listed amount precisely to 70, excluding Nimrod, who is an individual. There are 14 Japhethites, 30 Hamites, and 26 Shemites. The figure 70, even if not explicitly given, can hardly be fortuitous. The mere recognition in verse 5 of the existence of additional, unnamed “maritime nations” lends added significance to the enumeration as being deliberately chosen. In the biblical world, the number 70 is “typological”; that is, it is used for rhetorical effect to evoke the idea of totality, of comprehensiveness on a large scale, is opposed to the use of seven on a smaller scale. Thus, according to Genesis 46:27, the entire household of Jacob that went down to Egypt comprised 70 souls. The representative body of the entire community of Israel in the wilderness consisted of 70 elders, as recorded in Exodus 24:9 and Numbers 11:24; and the prophet Ezekiel, in 8:11, uses the same figure at the end of the period of the monarchy. ....
This strangely perplexing miscellany of peoples, tribes and places is no mere academic or scholastic exercise. It affirms, first of all, the common origin and absolute unity of humankind after the Flood; then it tacitly, but effectively, asserts that the varied instrumentalities of human divisiveness are all secondary to the essential unity of the international community, which truly constitutes a family of man.(Nahum Sarna, Genesis 10-11, available at Shammai.org)
Here we see that the world was already separated in languages before the fall of the tower - so the destruction of the tower is not so much a punishment as a return to the original intention of God.
Rachel Anisfeld insightfully connects the fact that the same sounds (B,V,N,L,S,SH) keep repeating over and over again throughout the story to the predicament of oppressive uniformity: “All of these repetitions create a throbbing, hypnotizing rhythm and a grating sense of sameness. All the people speak in the same manner, saying the same things with the same words because this is the communal refrain that has been inculcated into their consciousness through mesmerizing repetition.” Rachel Anisfeld, “The Generation of Bavel: A Misguided Unity,” Bikkurim: Midreshet Lindenbaum Torah Journal (May 1990), p. 9, cited in Klitsner, Subversive Sequels, p. 43.
The phrase kol ha-aretz appears five times in the nine verses: all three-, five- and especially seven-fold repetitions in a biblical passage signal the presence of a key theme.
The sentence seems to imply some criticism already - because of the previous sentences regarding what happened before, with the decendants of Noach.
The first has an incredible force of the individual - the violence reaches highs that one could not imagine - remember Lemech? The individual is all. The fear is, of course, present all the time. If you bump into someone like Lemech, powerful, probably skilled in the use of some weapon, he kills you. No similarity with the present is intended.
The second is when all conclude that only one thing is good: everyone should just do the same, and all will be well. Just follow and work. Again, no similarity with the present is intended. It is the Netziv who is the most verbal countervoice to the vision of the Tower, and who expresses his misgivings of totalitarianism.
Jonathan Sacks:
Did the division of languages happen before or after Babel? If it was after, then the narrative is not in chronological sequence. If before, then Babel cannot have been the cause.
Thanks to archaeology ... Mesopotamia, which included Babel/Babylon, was the home of the world’s first empires. The neo-Assyrians developed the practise of imposing their own language, Akkadian, on the peoples and nations they conquered. Ashurbanipal II boasted that he made all peoples “speak one speech”. Sargon II claimed that he had conquered many nations “with strange tongues and incompatible speech” and caused them all to “accept a single voice.”
(א) שפה אחת. זה גרם לחטא א׳. היינו שיסכימו לשבת כולן בקבוץ אחד. וזהו נגד רצון ה׳ שאמר שרצו בארץ ורבו בה היינו להתהלך לארכה ולרחבה כי לשבת יצרה:
One language - that is what cause the first sin. This is that they agreed to stop in one single place. And this is against the will of God that said to "fill the land and replenish it" - that is, to walk to all its places, since the land was created to be settled.
(א) ודברים אחדים. לא ביאר הכתוב הדברים אלא ברמז כמבואר במדרשים אבל לא פירשן הכתוב כי אם שהיו דברים אחדים וללמדנו דלא משום הדברים התעורר הקב״ה. כי אם בשביל שהיו אחדים. יהיו מה שיהיו. ודבר זה אם כי לפי הנראה אין בזה שום עון ואדרבה חבור עצבים ג״כ ראוי להניח. אבל כאן גרם לחשוב דבר שיצא לתקלת הישוב כאשר יבואר:
And the same words - The text did not explain what those words were, rather, it leaves as a hint, as explained in midrashim. But the words themselves are not explained by the text, it just tells us that they were the same words, to teach us that it wasn't because of the content of the words themselves that the Holy One of Blessing was distressed. They were what they were, and in its simplicity there is not sin, and on the contrary all appears well. But here what happened is that all thought the same thing, and this came to be the problem of the settlement.
(ד) פן נפוץ על פני כל הארץ. אמנם יש להבין מה חששו אם יצאו כמה לארץ אחרת. ומובן שזה היה שייך לדברים אחדים שהיה ביניהם ובאשר אין דעות ב״א שוים חששו שלא יצאו ב״א מדעה זו ויהיו במחשבה אחרת ע״כ היו משגיחים שלא יצא איש מישוב שלהם. ומי שסר מדברים אחדים שביניהם היה משפטו לשריפה כאשר עשו לא״א. נמצא היו דברים אחדים שביניהם לרועץ שהחליטו להרוג את מי שלא יחשוב כדעתם. ויבואר עוד להלן ו׳:
Lest we be scattered - However, we must understand why they feared that someone might leave to another land. And it is understood that this was related to the uniformity that was among them. And since the opinions of people are not identical, they feared that people might abandon this philosophy and adopt another. Therefore they sought to ensure that no one would leave their society. And one who veered from this uniformity among them was judged with burning, just as they did to our forefather Abraham. And the "same words" can also be seen as the fact that they would kill whoever did not think like them.
Also, note that there are no names in this story. All before and after there are names given. Both in the story of the generation of the flood - every one to his/her own and in this story - everyone for one thing - the names disappear.