LANGUAGE AND WRITING.
It was noted in the preceding chapter that Chaldaea, in the earliest
times to which we can go back, seems to have been inhabited by four
principal tribes. The early kings are continually represented on the
monuments as sovereigns over the Kiprat-arbat, or, Four Races. These
“Four Races” are called sometimes the Arba Lisun, or “Four Tongues,”
whence we may conclude that they were distinguished from one another,
among other differences, by a variety in their forms of speech. The
extent and nature of the variety could not, of course, be determined
merely from this expression; but the opinion of those who have most
closely studied the subject appears to be that the differences were great
and marked-the languages in fact belonging to the four great varieties of
human speech--Hamitic, Semitic, Arian, and Turanian.
The language which the early inscriptions have revealed to us is not, of
course, composed equally of these four elements. It does, however,
contain strong marks of admixture. It is predominantly Cushite in its
vocabulary, Turanian in its structure. Its closest analogies are with
such dialects as the _Mahra_ of Arabia, the _Galla_ and _Wolaitsa_ of
Abyssinia, and the ancient language of Egypt, but in certain cases it
more resembles the Turkish. Tatar, and Magyar (Turanian) dialects; while
in some it presents Semitic and in others Arian affinities. This will
appear sufficiently from the following list:
[Illustration: PAGE 42]
_Dingir, or Dimir,_ “God.” Compare Turkish _Tengri_.
_Atta,_ “father.” Compare Turkish atta. _Etea_ is “father” in the
Wolaitsa (Abyssinian) dialect.
_Sis,_ “brother.” Compare Wolaitsa and Woratta _isha_.
_Tur,_ “a youth,” “a son,” Compare the _tur-khan_ of the Parthians
(Turanians), who was the Crown Prince.
_E,_ “a house.” Compare ancient Egyptian _e,_ and Turkish _ev_.
_Ka,_ “a gate.” Compare Turkish _kapi_.
_Kharran,_ “a road.” Compare Galla _kara_.
_Huru,_ “a town.” Compare Heb. [--]
_Ar,_ “a river.” Compare Heb. [--] , Arab. _nahr_.
_Gabri_, “a mountain.” Compare Arabic _jabal_.
_Ki,_ “the earth.”
_Kingi,_ “a country.”
_San,_ “the sun.”
_Kha,_ “a fish”(?).
_Kurra,_ “a horse.” Compare Arabic _gurra_.
_Guski,_ “gold.” Compare Galla _irerke_. _Guski_ means also “red” and
“the evening.”
_Babar,_ “silver,” “white,” “the morning.” Compare Agau _ber,_ Tigre
_burrur_.
_Zabar,_ “copper.” Compare Arabic _sifr_.
_Hurud,_ “iron.” Compare Arabic _hadid_.
_Zakad,_ “the head.” Compare Gonga _toko_.
_Kat,_ “the hand.” Compare Gonga _kiso_.
_Si,_ “the eye.”
_Pi,_ “the ear.” Compare Magyar _ful_.
_Gula,_ “great.” Compare Galla _guda_.
_Tura,_ “little.” Compare Gonga _tu_ and Galla _tina_.
_Kelga,_ “powerful.”
_Ginn,_ “first.”
_Mis,_ “many.” Compare Agau _minch_ or _mench_.
_Gar,_ “to do.”
_Egir,_ “after.” Compare Hhamara (Abyssinian) _igria_.
The grammar of this language is still but very little known. The
conjugations of verbs are said to be very intricate and difficult, a
great variety of verbal forms being from the same root as in Hebrew, by
means of preformatives. Number and person in the verbs are marked by
suffixes--the third person singular (masculine) by _bi_ (compare Gonga
_bi,_ “he”), or _ani_ (compare Galla _enni,_ “he”), the third person
plural by _bi-nini_.
The accusative case in nouns is marked by a postposition, _ku_, as in
Hindustani. The plural of pronouns and substantives is formed sometimes
by reduplication. Thus _ni_ is “him,” while _nini_ is “them;” and
_Chanaan, Yavnan, Libnan_ seem to be plural forms from _Chna, Yavan_ and
_Liban_.
A curious anomaly occurs in the declension of pronouns.’ When accompanied
by the preposition kita, “with,” there is a tmesis of the preposition,
and the pronouns are placed between its first and second syllable; e.g.
vi, him’’-ki-ni-ta, “with him.” This takes place in every number and
person, as the following scheme will show:--
1st person. 2d person. 3d person.
Sing. _ki-mu-ta_ _ki-zu-ta_ _ki-ni-ta_
(with me) (with thee) (with him)
Plur. _ki mi-ta_ _ki zu-nini-ta_ _ki-nini-ta_
(with us) (with you) (with them)
N. B.--The formation of the second person plural deserves attention. The
word _zu-nini_ is, clearly, composed of the two elements, _zu,_ “thee,”
and _nini,_ “them”--so that instead of having a word for “you,” the
Chaldaeans employed for it the periphrasis “thee-them”! There is, I
believe, no known language which presents a parallel anomaly.
Such are the chief known features of this interesting but difficult form
of speech. A specimen may now be given of the mode in which it was
written. Among the earliests of the monuments hitherto discovered are a
set of bricks bearing the following cuneiform inscription [PLATE VI.,
Fig. 3]:
This inscription is explained to mean:--“Beltis, his lady, has caused
Urukh (?), the pious chief, King of Hur, and King of the land (?) of the
Akkad, to build a temple to her.” In the same locality where it occurs,
bricks are also found bearing evidently the same inscription, but written
in a different manner. Instead of the wedge and arrow-head being the
elements of the writing, the whole is formed by straight lines of almost
uniform thickness, and the impression seems to have been made by a single
stamp. [PLATE VII., Fig. 1.]
[Illustration: PLATE 7]
This mode of writing, which has been called without much reason “the
hieratic,” and of which we have but a small number of instances, has
confirmed a conjecture, originally suggested by the early cuneiform
writing itself, that the characters were at first the pictures of
objects. In some cases the pictorial representation is very plain and
palpable.
[Etext Editor’s Note: the next two pages contain many examples
of heiratic symbols [--] which can be seen only in the html file
or the jpg image <page0044.jpg>]
[Illustration: PAGE 44]
For instance, the “determinative” of a god--the sign that is, which marks
that the name of a god is about to follow, in this early rectilinear
writing is [--] an eight-rayed star. The archaic cuneiform keeps closely
to this type, merely changing the lines into wedges, thus [--], while the
later cuneiform first unites the oblique wedges in one [--] , and then
omits them as unnecessary, retaining only the perpendicular and the
horizontal ones [--] . Again, the character representing the word “hand”
is, in the rectilinear writing [--] , in the archaic cuneiform [--] ,
in the later cuneiform [--] . The five lines (afterwards reduced to four)
clearly represent the thumb and the four fingers. So the character
ordinarily representing “a house” is evidently formed from the original
--, the ground-plan of a house; and that denoting “the sun” [--] , comes
from [--] , through [--] , and [--] , the original [--] being the best
representation that straight lines could give of the sun. In the case of
_ka,_ “a gate,” we have not the original design; but we may see posts,
bars, and hinges in [--] , the ordinary character.
Another curious example of the pictorial origin of the letters is
furnished by the character [--] , which is the French _une,_ the feminine
of “one.” This character may be traced up through several known forms to
an original picture, which is thus given on a Koyunjik tablet [--] . It has
been conjectured that the object here represented is “a sarcophagus.”
But the true account seems to be that it is a _double-toothed comb,_ a
toilet article peculiar to women, and therefore one which might well be
taken to express “a woman,” or more generally the feminine gender. It is
worth notice that the emblem is the very one still in use among the Lurs,
in the mountains overhanging Babylonia. And it is further remarkable
that the phonetic power of the character here spoken of is _it_ (or
_yat_)the ordinary Semitic feminine ending.
The original writing, it would therefore seem, was a picture-writing as
rude as that of the Mexicans. Objects were themselves represented, but
coarsely and grotesquely--and, which is especially remarkable, without
any curved lines. This would seem to indicate that the system grew up
where a hard material, probably stone, was alone used. The cuneiform
writing arose when clay took the place of stone as a material. A small
tool with a square or triangular point, impressed, by a series of
distinct touches, the outline of the old pictured objects on the soft
clay of tablets and bricks. In course of time simplifications took
place. The less important wedges were omitted. One stroke took the
place of two, or sometimes of three. In this way the old form of objects
became, in all but a few cases, very indistinct; while generally it was
lost altogether.
Originally each character had, it would seem, the phonetic power of the
name borne by the object which it represented. But, as this namee was
different in the languages of the different tribes inhabiting the
country, the same character came often to have several distinct phonetic
values. For instance, the character [--] representing “a house,” had the
phonetic values of _e, bit,_ and _mal,_ because those were the words
expressive of “a house,” among the Hamitic, Semitic, and Arian
populations respectively. Again, characters did not always retain their
original phonetic powers, but abbreviated them. Thus the character which
originally stood for _Assur,_ “Assyria,” came to have the sound of _as,_
that denoting _bil_, “a lord,” had in addition the sound of _bi,_ and so
on. Under these circumstances it is almost impossible to feel any
certainty in regard to the phonetic representation of a single line of
these old inscriptions. The meaning of each word may be well known; but
the articulate sounds which were in the old times attached to them may be
matter almost of conjecture.
The Chaldaean characters are of three kinds-letters proper, monograms,
and determinatives. With regard to the letters proper, there is nothing
particular to remark, except that they have almost always a syllabic
force. The monograms represent in a brief way, by a wedge or a group of
wedges, an entire word, often of two or three syllables, as Nebo, Babil,
Merodach, etc. The determinatives mark that the word which they
accompany is a word of a certain class, as a god, a man, a country, a
town, etc. These last, it is probable, were not sounded at all when the
word was read. They served, in some degree, the purpose of our capital
letters, in the middle of sentences, but gave more exact notice of the
nature of the coming word. Curiously enough, they are retained
sometimes, where the word which they accompany has merely its phonetic
power, as (generally) when the names of gods form a part of the names
of monarchs.
It has been noticed already that the chief material on which the ancient
Chaldaeans wrote was moist clay, in the two forms of tablets and bricks.
On bricks are found only royal inscriptions, having reference to the
building in which the bricks were used, commonly designating its purpose,
and giving the name and titles of the-monarch who erected it. The
inscription does not occupy the whole brick, but a square or rectangular
space towards its centre. It is in some cases stamped, in some impressed
with a tool. The writing--as in all cuneiform inscriptions, excepting
those upon seals--is from left to right, and the lines are carefully
separated from one another. Some specimens have been already given.
The tablets of the Chaldaeans are among the most remarkable of their
remains, and will probably one day throw great additional light on the
manners and customs, the religion, and even, perhaps, the science and
learning, of the people. They are small pieces of clay, somewhat rudely
shaped into a form resembling a pillow, and thickly inscribed with
cuneiform characters, which are sometimes accompanied by impressions of
the cylindrical seals so common in the museums of Europe. The seals are
rolled across the body of the document, as in the accompanying figure.
[PLATE VII., Fig. 2.] Except where these impressions occur, the clay is
commonly covered on both sides with minute writing. What is most
curious, however, is that the documents thus duly attested have in
general been enveloped, after they were baked, in a cover of moist clay,
upon which their contents have been again inscribed, so as to present
externally a duplicate of the writing within; and the tablet in its cover
has then been baked afresh. That this was the process employed is
evident from the fact that the inner side of the envelope bears a cast,
in relief, of the inscription beneath it. Probably the object in view
was greater security--that if the external cover became illegible, or was
tampered with, there might be a means of proving beyond a doubt what the
document actually contained. The tablets in question have in a
considerable number of cases been deciphered; they are for the most part
deeds, contracts, or engagements, entered into by private persons and
preserved among the archives of families.
Besides their writings on clay, the Chaldaeans were in the habit, from
very early times, of engraving inscriptions on gems. The signet cylinder
of a very ancient king exhibits that archaic formation of letters which
has been already noted as appearing upon some of the earliest bricks.
[PLATE VII., Fig. 3.] That it belongs to the same period is evident,
not only from the resemblance of the literal type, but from the fact that
the same king’s name appears upon both. This signet inscription--so far
as it has been hitherto deciphered--is read as follows:--“The signet of
Urukh, the pious chief, king of Ur, . . . . High-Priest (?) of . . . .
Niffer.” Another similar relic, belonging to a son of this monarch, has
the inscription, “To the manifestation of Nergal, king of Bit-Zida, of
Zurgulla, for the saving of the life of Ilgi, the powerful hero, the king
of Ur, . . . . son of Urukh . . . . May his name be preserved.” A third
signet, which belongs to a later king in the series, bears the following
legend: “--_sin, the powerful chief, the king of Ur, the king of the
Kiprat-arbat (or four races) . . . . his seal.” The cylinders, however,
of this period are more usually without inscriptions, being often plain,
and often engraved with figures, but without a legend.