MORPHEUS, “The God of Sleep,” (_Greek & Latin._) M.r.ph.e, “Slothful,”
(_Heb._)
An interesting consideration deserves especial notice in this place. On
referring to the doubtful and unsatisfactory explanations which have been
suggested for many of these names of the Gods of Greece and Italy, both by
Cicero and by modern writers, who have relied solely on the intrinsic
resources of the Classical languages, the superior clearness and
simplicity of the explanations afforded by the aid of the Hebrew will be
strikingly apparent.(99)
The Gods Of India.
BRAHMA, “The Creator,” (_Indian._) B.r.a, “To Create,” applied to the
creative act of the Deity in the First Chapter of Genesis, (_Hebrew._)
Beri or Peri, “To Cause,” Bâr, or Pâr, “A Cause,” (_Welsh._)
SIVA, “The Destroyer,” (_Indian._) Sh.v.a.e, “Desolate;” Sha-e, “To
Desolate,” (_Heb._)
VISH-NU, “The Preserver or Saviour,” (_Ind._) Ee.sh.v.o.e, “Safety,
Salvation.” (This root is applied to the Saviour with the prefix M. in
M|Ou.sh.oe,“The Messiah.”) Ee.sho, “To save,” (_Heb._)
RAMA, “A conquering Deity, a great Deliverer,” the same as the Greek
Hercules, (_Indian._) R.m, “To be lifted up, exalted.” R.m.e, “To throw,
cast down,” (_Hebrew._)
CAMA, “The Indian Cupid.” One of his titles is “Depaca, the Inflamer,”
“Love,” (_Indian._) Ee.ch.m, “To be lustful,” Ch.m, Ch.m.e, “Heat,”
Ch.m.s, “To ravish,” (_Hebrew._)
SUR-YA, “A God of the Sun,” (_Indian._) See p. 20.
SAT-YAVRATA, “Saturn” of the Latins. Sat.ya, means “Truth or Probity,”
(_Indian._) Sh.th, “To set, settle, fix,” (Hence “Sooth,” English, not
from “He saith,” as Horne Tooke conceived.) T.z.d.k, “Just,” T.z.d.k.e,
“Justice, righteousness,” (_Hebrew._)
I shall now advert to some features of considerable interest in the
condition of the primitive founders of the European nations, of which
language furnishes evidence.
The first emigrants must in many instances have brought with them from the
East a knowledge of fermented liquors, as is shown by the following
examples:
Wine (_English_), Vin-um (_Latin_), Oin-os (_Greek_), Ee.ee.n (_Hebrew_),
primarily “The expressed juice of the grape,” from Ee.n.e, “To press,
squeeze,” (_Hebrew_.)
Osai, “Cyder, sweet liquor,” (_Welsh_,) O.s.ee.s, “Wine,” (_Hebrew_,) from
O.s, O.s.s, “To trample”, applied to the Grapes.
M.th.k, “Sweet, sweetness,” (_Hebrew_.) Metheg-lyn (_Welsh_,) i.e. M.th.k,
“Sweet,” (_Hebrew_,) and-Lyn, “Liquor,” (_Welsh_.) Methu, “Wine,” (Greek.)
Methou, “Drunk,” (_Welsh_.) These terms may be regarded as primarily
derived from a word expressive “of Honey,” and of the wine made from that
particular substance, as in Madhu, “Honey,” (_Sanscrit_,) “Mead”
(_English_.)
Mêl (_Welsh_), Mel (_Latin_), Meli (_Greek_), “Honey.” Melissa, “A Bee,”
(_Greek._) Mel-ys, “Sweet,” (_Welsh._) Melitos, “Honeyed, placid,”
(_Greek._) M.l.ts, “To sweeten, to assuage,” (Hebrew.) Melith, “Honey,”
(_Gothic._)
Writers on subjects of this nature have inferred that in the earliest
stage of society the human species subsisted on the spontaneous fruits of
the earth or by the chase; the Pastoral state was the next step, and the
adoption of agricultural pursuits the last stage in the progress. The
Celtic and other European languages furnish very distinct evidence that
some of the European nations must have advanced as far as the Pastoral
state previously to their migration from the East.
The art of making “Butter” is expressed in the Celtic by a word of which
the Oriental origin is clear:
Im,(100) “Butter,” (_Gaelic_.)
c’H.m.a.e, “Butter,” from c’H.m.a, “To agitate, to churn,” (_Hebrew_.)
As this Celtic word is quite unlike the Latin, its Oriental origin is
clear. It also follows that the primitive art it describes could not have
been borrowed from the Romans.
The evidence with regard to “Cheese” is doubtful. Caseus (_Latin_) may be
viewed as allied to K.sh.e, “To harden, to stiffen,” (_Hebrew_.) But as
the Hebrew does not present the secondary sense, there is no ground to
infer that this art was brought from the east. Nor, considering the
resemblance of the Latin Caseus and the Welsh Caws, “Cheese,” can we infer
from language, as in the instance of “Butter,” that the Celts did not
borrow this process from the Romans, which most probably they did.
The following is a comparison, showing at the same time the identity of
the names for some of the most common animals in the Hebrew and the
Indo-European languages, and also the interesting fact, which is evident
from several of these examples, that many of the prevalent European names
for Chattels and Money are identical with Hebrew words for Cattle, Sheep,
&c., _which form the only wealth of the Pastoral state!_
B.k.r, “Cattle,” (_Heb._) Pecora, plural of Pec-us, “Cattle,” (_Lat._)
Hence, Pecunia, “Money,” (_Lat._) Buwch, “A cow,” (_Welsh._)
R.c.sh, “Cattle, Riches,” (_Hebrew._) Reikis, “Riches,” (_Gothic._)
Riches (_English._)
A.l.ph, singular. A.l.ph-eem, plural, “Cattle,” (_Heb._) Alav, singular.
Alav-oedd, plural, “Cattle, Wealth,” (_Welsh._)
“Sheep” (_English._) Schaaf (_German._) C.sh.b, C.b.sh (_Heb._) Sh.e, “A
Lamb,” (_Heb._)
“Sheep,” Kaora, (_Irish._) Cor-lan, “A Sheep-fold,” (_Welsh._) C.r, “A
Lamb, also a pasture or circuit for cattle,” (_Heb._)
“A Horse,” Ashwah Eshuus (_Sanscrit._) S.w.s, or S.ou.s,(101)
(Heb.)—Pferd (_German_,) Peerdt (_Belgian_,) in the Hebrew, Ph.r.sh-eem,
“Horsemen.”
“Cow” (_English._) Go (_Sanscrit._) G.o.e, “To low like an ox,”
(_Hebrew._)
“A Cat,” C’h.th.ou.l, (_Hebrew._) Cath (_Welsh._) Cat (_English._)
“A Monkey,” Kăpi, (_Sanscrit._) Kouph (_Heb._)
“Goat,” Aix Aig-os, (_Greek._) Aja (_Sans._) A.k.ou (_Heb._) “A name given
to the wild goat from its cry.”
“Hog, Swine,” &c., Sukarah (_Sans._) Khūk (_Persian._) Hog (_Eng._) Houch
(_Welsh._) Hus (_Greek._) C’H.z.ee.r (_Hebrew._)
“Serpent” (_English._) Serpens (_Latin._) Sarf (_Welsh._) Sh.r.ph
(_Hebrew._) Serpo, “To Creep,” (_Latin._)
“Reptile, Serpent,” &c., Neid-yr, “A Serpent,” (_Welsh._) Newt, “A small
Lizard,” (_English._) N.d.l, “A Reptile,” (_Chaldæ._)
“Turtle Dove” (_English._) Turtur (_Latin._) T.r, T.ou.r (_Hebrew._)
The connexion between the Hebrew and the English is remarkably complete,
the same words occurring in both languages unchanged in sound and sense! A
few examples are subjoined, consisting in many cases of words of pure
Anglo-Saxon origin, rarely or never used by the refined classes of
society.
N.k.m, To avenge, (_Hebrew,_) To nick (_English._)—N.g.o, To touch, To
draw nigh, (_Hebrew_,) Nudge, Nigh (_English._)—B.r, A Son, (_Hebrew_,)
Bairn (_L. Scotch_,) Brat (_English._)—Sh.c.l, To be wise, Wisdom,
Cunning, (_Hebrew_,) Skill (_English._)—B.k.sh, To seek, To petition,
(_Hebrew_,) Bhikshati, Beggeth, (_Sans._) Beg (_English._)—Sh.l.t, A
Shield, (_Hebrew_,) Shield (_English_,) Shalita, Covered, (_Sanscrit_,)
Shalitra, “Shelter,” (_Sanscrit_,) Shelter (_English_,) Shieling (_L.
Scotch._)—L.b, The Heart, Feeling, Will, (_Hebrew_,) Liebe, Love,
(_German_,) Lief, Dear, Willingly, (_English._)
Colonel Vans Kennedy, to whom we are indebted for a very able work
conclusively showing the original identity of the Sanscrit and English and
other languages termed Indo-European, is one of the most strenuous
opponents of the supposition that a connexion may be shown to exist
between these languages and the Hebrew, an idea which he treats as in the
highest degree visionary and delusive! In the following, as in some of the
previous examples, the instances of resemblance between the Sanscrit and
the English which this writer has himself selected are compared with
Hebrew words, identical with these terms in sound and sense! In many cases
it will be seen that the Hebrew terms are even nearer to the English than
the Sanscrit terms are!
Măhătwah (_Sans._) Might (_Eng._) M.a.d, “Might,” (_Heb._)—Rosha, Rāga
(_Sans._) Rage (_Eng._) R.g.z (_Heb._)—Kupam, A Receptacle, (_Sans._) Coop
(_Eng._) K.ph.ts, To shut, close up, contract, (_Heb._)—Duhitr (_Sans._)
Daughter (_Eng._) Dochter (_Scotch._) D.g, To multiply, (_Heb._) Tek-os,
Progeny; Tek-on, Bringing forth, (_Greek._)—Shringa (_Sans._) Horn
(_Eng._) Cornu (_Lat._) K.r.n (_Heb._)—Āpăt, A Calamity, (_Sans._)
Ab.ad.n, Destruction, (_Heb._)—Bălăwān, Powerful, (_Sans._) B.o.l, A
Master, to have power, (_Heb._) “Baal,” i.e. The Ruler, name of an
idol.—Shira, The Head, (_Sans._) Sh.r, A Prince, A Ruler,
(_Heb._)—Ghăshăti (_Sans._) Gusheth (_Eng._) G.sh.m, To rain, A violent
Shower, (_Heb._) “Geesers,” Fountains of Hot Water in Iceland.—Grŭshta
(_Sans._) Grist (_Eng._) G.r.s, To break, crush to pieces, Wheat beaten
out, (_Heb._)—Torati (_Sans._) Teareth, Tore, (_Eng._) T.r.ph, To tear
off, To tear to pieces, (_Heb._) Tori (_Welsh_.)—Diyati (_Sans._) Dieth
(_Eng._) Dee.e, Blackness of colour,(102) (_Heb._) Dee.ou.a, The Devil,
(_Syriac_.) Dee.ou.v, Ink, (_Heb._) Dee, Black, (_Welsh_.)—Pesati
(_Sans._) Paceth (_Eng._) Psh.o, To pass, a pace, (_Heb._)—Rănăti
(_Sans._) Runneth (_Eng._) R.n (_Heb._)—Shara (_Sans._) Gar. Arrow
(_Ang.-Sax._) Sh.r.ee.e, A Dart, (_Heb._)—Shatati (_Sans._) Shutteth;
Sheath, (_Eng._) S.th.m, To stop up, hide, conceal, S.th.ce.m.e, A Secret,
(_Heb._) Stum, Dumb, (_Ger._)
It must be quite evident that in these examples the affinity in _words_
between the Hebrew and the Indo-European languages is as close as that
which exists among those languages themselves. The difference of
grammatical forms has been much insisted upon. This ground, where it
occurs, has already been proved to afford no evidence of a remote
difference of race. (See p. 89.) But in treating of the North American
Indian dialects, I shall show that no such grammatical difference does
exist in this instance, the Hebrew pronouns, which are the basis of its
grammar, being identical with those of the Welsh,(103) now considered to
be a member of the Indo-European group of tongues.
CHAPTER V. IDENTITY OF THE EGYPTIANS WITH THE INDIANS, JEWS, AND OTHER
BRANCHES OF THE HUMAN RACE.
SECTION I.
_Identity of the ancient Indian and Egyptian Mythology, &c. Names
of the Egyptian Gods, significant in the Hebrew and Indo-European
Tongues. Dr. Lepsius’s comments on Champollion’s opinion that the
Modern Egyptian does not differ from the Egyptian of the oldest
Monuments. Proofs of changes. Proofs from Language that the origin
of the Egyptians cannot be referred to the very remote date fixed
by some writers. Causes of the primitive features of the Hebrew
and the Sanscrit. Identity of Sanscrit and Scriptural account of
the Creation and of the Origin of the Human Race. Sir William
Jones’s explanation of this coincidence. High antiquity of the
Indian Vedas._
We are indebted to Dr. Prichard(104) for a comprehensive and satisfactory
demonstration of the resemblance in manners, mythology, and in social and
political institutions of the ancient Egyptians and Indians. These Nations
agreed in religious and philosophical dogmas, in a superstitious
veneration of animals and of the most conspicuous objects of nature, in
the system of Castes, and in other features. Dr. Prichard’s German
translator, the celebrated A. W. Schlegel, has attempted to account for
these points of coincidence by the ordinary tendencies of human nature
under similar circumstances, a theory which, though maintained with
distinguished ability, must be felt to be essentially paradoxical. As Dr.
Prichard observes: “No person who fully considers the intimate relation
and almost exact parallelism that has been traced between the Egyptians
and the Hindoos, will be perfectly satisfied with such a solution in that
particular example.”(105)
Dr. Prichard concludes that these features of resemblance must be ascribed
to a common origin. But in the adoption of this conclusion he encounters a
formidable difficulty, arising from the consideration that the Egyptian
Tongue cannot, according to his views, be identified with the other
languages of mankind.
This difficulty, like many others of the same nature, will be found to
receive a satisfactory solution from the comparison contained in Appendix
A, in which are embodied a greater number of words from the Egyptian than
from any other language of the African continent. It will thence be
evident that the failure which has attended the attempts of the writers
noticed by Dr. Prichard to identify the Egyptian with the Asiatic
languages, has arisen from the predominant error of Philological
writers,—viz. the expectation of finding in every respect a close and
peculiar affinity between the languages of nations, who, though
contiguous, must in all probability have been separated in the earliest
ages of the world. Hence the unsuccessful issue of those researches of
which the object has been to show that the Egyptian is a dialect of the
Hebrew. But, notwithstanding the unfavorable result which has necessarily
attended investigations conducted on a false basis, it will be seen,
nevertheless, that the adoption of a wider range of comparison, agreeably
to the principles explained at p. 16 and p. 87, and carried out in
Appendix A, serves to render unequivocally manifest the original unity of
the Egyptians not only with the Jews and other nations of Asia, but also
with those of all the four continents. In this place I shall introduce, in
illustration of this proposition, some additional examples, which possess
an independent interest in connexion with Dr. Prichard’s inquiry into the
mythology of the Egyptians, and with the analogous inquiries pursued in
the last Chapter of this work.
The Names of most, if not all, of the Egyptian Gods are susceptible of a
perfectly unequivocal explanation by means of the Hebrew and the
Indo-European languages.(106) This will be evident from the following
analysis, in which I have availed myself of the account of their names and
attributes given by a high authority—Mr. Wilkinson.(107)
“Neph, Phtah, and Khem,” the first three of the Egyptian Gods noticed
below, represent attributes of the Deity.
KNEPH, or, more properly, NEPH or NEF, “The Spirit of God which moved on
the face of the Waters.”(108) Nouf, “Spirit.” Nife, “To breathe, to blow.”
Nifi, “Inspiration,” (_Egypt._) This word, Neph, has been shown to exist
in the same and in analogous senses in the Hebrew and Indo-European
tongues. It has also been pointed out as occurring in a remarkable
instance as a word for a “Spirit,” and also as a name of the “Supreme
Being,” among the North American Indians. (See p. 24.(109))
PTHAH, “The Creative Power that made the World,” styled “The Father of the
Gods.”(110)
Pita, Pitre (_Sanscrit_,) “A Father.” Phu-o, “Gĭgnō, Produco.” Phu teuō,
“Machinor Semĭno.” Pat-er, “A Father,” (_Greek._)
KHEM, “The Sun.” (See p. 21.)
RAH, “Sun,” “The Material and Visible Orb.” (See App. pp. 2 and 3.)
_Ph-Rah_, “Ph,” “The,” and Rah, “Sun.” Hence the name “Pharaoh,” applied
to the Kings of Egypt.
AMUN-RA, “The splendour and beneficent property of the Sun,”
“Jupiter-Ammon” of the classical nations.
The word A.m.n, in Hebrew, implies “nurturing or fostering care, to
support, to sustain,” In Egypt there is a verb Amoni “To hold,” and Āmoni
“To feed.” Amoun in Hebrew, and Mone in Egypt, mean “A Nurse,” and in
Egypt “A Shepherd.”
Amoni, “Patience,” (_Egypt._) Amyn-edd “Patience,” Amoun “To defend,” M-ou
yn, “Kind,” (_Welsh._)
NEITH or MAUT, “Minerva, called the Mother of the Gods.” Mata
(_Sanscrit._) Mat-er (_Latin._) Maau (_Egypt._) A.m.a (_Heb._) “A Mother.”
The names of Osiris and Serapis have been explained at p. 20; that of Hor
(“Horus,”) in Appendix A, p. 2; that of Io, “The Visible Body of the
Moon,”(111) in Appendix A, pp. 24-25.
It will be observed that the Egyptian mythology, like that of the
Indo-European nations, as noticed in the last section, distinctly combines
with Personifications of the powers of nature, views of the attributes and
agencies of the Supreme Being which occur in the Hebrew Scriptures, as in
the instance of “Neph.” It is remarkable that the same allusion as this
name presents, occurs in the Hindoo mythology in Náráyana, one of the
names given to Vishnu, the Deity viewed as a preserver or Saviour. Sir
William Jones thus explains this term in a quotation from a passage in
which Menu, the son of Brahma, begins his address to the Sages who
consulted him on the formation of the Universe. “The waters are called
_nárà_, since they are the offspring of NERA, (or I’SWARA;) and thence was
Náráyana named, because his first _ayana_ or _moving_, was on them!”(112)
N-Eerooue means “Waters” in Egyptian, from Eiero, “Water,” the plural
being formed by N prefix.
Thus it is evident that a comparison of languages in those very instances
which are connected with the subject, so far from impugning the conclusion
that the mythology of the Hindoos and Egyptians had a common origin,
affords irresistible corroborative proofs of the correctness of that
opinion. Further, it is apparent in the instance of the Egyptian as of the
Indo-European race, that their religious system embodied, in combination
with an idolatrous superstructure, the same views of the Supreme Being as
are developed in the Pentateuch.
In some of the foregoing instances, the words of which the names of the
Egyptian gods are composed have been preserved in the Egyptian itself
conjointly with the Hebrew and other languages. But there are also several
instances in which these terms have been lost in the Egyptian, though
preserved in other tongues. This is a distinct proof that the origin of
the Egyptian language is mainly ascribable to the same cause, which has
been previously pointed out as the principal source of the gradual
divergence of the different dialects of the Celtic and Scandinavian, &c.
The Egyptian cannot be said to differ from the Hebrew or the Sanscrit more
widely than the Celtic and Gothic differ, though the common origin of the
two last may be shown indisputably. At what precise periods the different
changes in the Egyptian language took place, we have not as yet the means
of fully deciding. But we are not altogether without historical evidence
that this language has undergone mutations, analogous to those which have
occurred in other tongues. Champollion, to whose genius we are principally
indebted for a solution of the Egyptian system of hieroglyphics, was of
opinion that the Coptic or modern Egyptian is perfectly identical with the
language of the most ancient monuments. But this opinion has been combated
with ability and success by Dr. Lepsius, to whom we owe much information
with regard to the ancient Egyptian remains, especially the brilliant
discovery that the alphabet of Egyptian hieroglyphics, supposed by
Champollion to consist of 300, is reducible to thirty letters.(113) Dr.
Lepsius points out many striking instances of deviation. Thus he notices
that Plutarch, in explaining the name of Osiris, whose symbol was The Eye,
informs us that the Egyptians called the Eye “Iri,” a word not found in
the Coptic, in which “Bal” is the only term used for that organ.
Dr. Lepsius has also produced in illustration of his views several
examples, in which he infers from the mode of spelling, that the same
terms must have been pronounced in the age of hieroglyphics in a different
manner from what they were in the Coptic. The following are instances:
English. Ancient Egyptian Of Modern Egyptian Or
The Age Of Coptic.
Hieroglyphics.
The Sun R.ha. Ra.
Day H.rou. Hour.
The Sea Imo. Iom.
A Swine R.ri. Rir.
It has been previously shown by a comparison of tongues of which the
history can be traced, that language in its infancy appears to have
abounded in full and harsh tones and in rough aspirates, which were
gradually exchanged for softer and more abbreviated forms during more
advanced stages of society. The conformity of these examples to this
principle will be obvious, especially when they are compared with the
instances of similar changes in the Manx and Irish, &c. noticed at page
108, a comparison which must tend very strongly to confirm the soundness
of Dr. Lepsius’s conclusions. Since the recent origin of the Hebrew and
Sanscrit languages and of the Hebrew and Indian nations have been shown on
the one hand, while on the other the identity of the Egyptian with those
tongues has also been established, it follows that the origin of the
Egyptian nation cannot be referred to a period anterior to that which our
received systems of chronology would lead us to adopt as the era of the
separation of nations. The harsh and full pronunciation which seems to
have characterized the most ancient specimens of the Egyptian language
tends strongly to support the same conclusion.
In the previous pages a peculiarly primitive character has been attributed
to two ancient languages just adverted to, viz. the Hebrew and the
Sanscrit. Both these tongues, it has been observed, display in a higher
degree than any other the characteristic features of language near its
source. As regards the former of these tongues, the Hebrew, there is an
obvious reason for the primitive forms of language it involves in the high
antiquity of a portion of its remains, viz. the first Books of Scripture,
which are more ancient by many centuries than the poems of Homer, the most
venerable literary remains of Europe. It is a remarkable fact that there
is every reason to believe that the same explanation will be found to
apply in an equal degree to the Sanscrit. According to the opinions of
many of the most distinguished Orientalists, it would appear that the
earliest Vedas, the oldest mythological books of the Indians, are not less
ancient than the Pentateuch. Sir William Jones, whose candour and love of
truth were not inferior to his accomplishments, concluded the Vedas to
have been written about 1500 years B.C. The soundness of this opinion was
at one time much questioned; but it has been confirmed by the sanction of
some of the ablest of those who,—with the advantage of more recently
accumulated information, have in our time pursued the same path of
inquiry—in a manner that serves to place in a striking point of view the
vast knowledge and the bold and sagacious judgment of its great author.
Ritter, a distinguished German Orientalist, concludes the Vedas to have
been collected during the period from 1400 to 1600, B.C.; and Mr.
Colebrooke, whose researches are of the highest value, appears to have
shown finally that the earliest Vedas were probably written about 1400
years B.C.(114) It is highly deserving of notice that these various dates
all fall about the time of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, 1490
B.C.
The account given in the Vedas of the early history of the world coincides
in its most important features with the Scriptural relation in a manner
not to be mistaken. Sir William Jones, struck with these features of
resemblance, has intimated an opinion that the Indian account of the
Creation, of the Deluge,(115) and other events may have been borrowed from
the Jewish nation.(116) It is remarkable that this opinion will be found
to involve a singular anachronism, if we adopt Sir William Jones’s own
views with respect to the date of the Vedas, viz. that they were written
1500 years B.C. This date is ten years prior to the Exodus of the
Israelites from Egypt, an event from which their national existence and
the composition of their earliest scriptures may be said to have
commenced.
It is highly improbable in every point of view that the Indians could have
borrowed from the Jews some of the most important doctrines of their
religious belief. But the coincidences noticed by Sir William Jones and
other writers, and the peculiarly vivid and distinct nature of the
accounts contained in the Vedas, admit of a more simple and consistent
explanation. If, agreeably to the opinions of Mr. Colebrooke, we assume
these books to have been compiled about 1400 years B.C., it would follow
that they embody a narrative much nearer in point of date to the events
they record than any other, with the exception of the Pentateuch.
From the Deluge to 1400 B.C. there was a lapse of 948 years only. Now we
have satisfactory evidence that traditions far less calculated to leave a
lasting impression have been preserved in many instances among separate
tribes with considerable uniformity for a much longer period. Thus we know
that the Fairy Tales of the English and Germans, and of the Welsh and
Armoricans, agree in their main features, though in both instances there
has been a separation for an interval of much greater duration.
Traditions similar to those embodied in the Vedas occur in the classical
fable of Deucalion and Pyrrha, in the remains of the Chaldeans, and of
other primitive nations. It is only in the Scriptural narrative that we
meet with a relation of the first incidents in the history of man
unmingled with fables derogatory to the attributes of his Creator. But
though clouded with mythological fictions, the remains of many ancient
nations impressively display a fresh and vivid reminiscence of the sublime
events they record.
SECTION II.
_High Antiquity of the Egyptian Nation. Interesting Character of
Egyptian Remains. Extent of Egyptian Conquests. Tartars,
Parthians, Turks, &c. Figures of Jews on Egyptian Monuments.
Egyptian and Semetic Languages and Races connecting links between
the Asiatic and African Languages and Races._
The Egyptian annals of Manetho seem to convey the inference that there
must have been in Egypt a series of thirty dynasties, whose reigns
occupied a period of time reaching far beyond the commencement of our
received chronology. It appears, however, that in the present age the most
eminent writers on the antiquities of Egypt are agreed in rejecting this
conclusion. The long dynasties of these chronicles are referred by some
writers to repetition, by others to the coexistence of distinct dynasties
in different parts of Egypt.
But the same eminent writers who have agreed in repudiating the conclusion
that seems to be conveyed by Manetho may be said to be equally unanimous
in referring the origin of the Egyptians to a date which, tried by the
standard of received chronology, will be found to coincide with the very
first age in the history of nations.
“By a comparison of Manetho’s work with the Theban table of Eratosthenes,”
observes Dr. Prichard,(117) “we find satisfactory data for fixing the
origin of the Egyptian monarchy as deduced from these documents in the
24th century before our era.”
Other eminent writers on this subject do not perfectly coincide with Dr.
Prichard in adopting this precise date. But they all fix on pretty nearly
the same time, which, it will be observed, is about the era of the Flood
of Scripture, which immediately preceded the diffusion of the human race.
In the annexed Table I have introduced a compendious statement of the
views of these writers, more especially of the author of a work entitled
“A Monumental History of Egypt,” in a form that will exhibit concurrently
the principal Chronological facts and the progress of Writing in Egypt. I
may observe that Dr. Lepsius is of opinion that Hieroglyphics, which is a
mode of conveying ideas by representations of objects without reference to
their names, was the source,—(by means of a gradual transition,)—of
phonetic characters, which represented their names or words.
Egyptian Chronology. Progress Of Hieroglyphics And
Writing.
_Doubtful Period._
The accession of Menai or
Menes, and earlier Egyptian
Kings.(118)
First Pyramid built, it is No hieroglyphics on this
supposed, B.C. 2123 Pyramid.
_Historical._
Abraham visits Egypt. 1920 Hieroglyphics invented, and
gave rise to Phonetic writing,
between 2123 and 1740.
Osirtasen united Egypt into The name of Osirtasen, in this
one Monarchy. 1740 reign the first known specimen
of Phonetic characters.
(_Monumental Hist._)
Joseph in Egypt. 1706
18th Dynasty. 1576 Age of MSS. (_Dr. Lepsius._)
According to the author of the Monumental History, previously to the year
1740 B.C., the commencement of the reign of Osirtasen, who is believed to
have been the contemporary and patron of Joseph, “we have little to guide
us on the Monuments of ancient Egypt.” According to the same writer, he
was the first who united Egypt into one kingdom, that country, he
maintains, having previously been divided into little unimportant
kingdoms.
The arguments of this able writer, however, do not impugn the conclusion,
that though the precise date may be uncertain, the origin of the Egyptian
nation must be referred to the first ages of the human race. The condition
of the Egyptians in 1740 B.C. implies a prior existence for many ages, of
which we have a distinct proof in the visit of (the Patriarch) Abraham two
centuries previously.
The marvellous discoveries made in our day by Champollion, Belzoni, and
others, may be said to have thrown a new light on the early history not
only of Egypt but of the world! Proofs the most startling have been
brought to light of the vast political power and high civilization of the
Egyptian nation, combined with a knowledge of science in many branches
scarcely surpassed in the present and not equalled in the last generation
of European nations! In the Egyptian paintings we have the most distinct
portraits, representing not only Negroes, Jews, and other neighbouring
races, but also of nations whose light complexions, peculiar physiognomy,
and equipments, combined as they sometimes are with delineations of the
costumes or natural productions of the countries of which they were
natives, betoken the inhabitants of more northern latitudes, confirming
the account of Tacitus, who states “The Egyptians overran all Libya and
Ethiopia, and subdued the Medes and Persians, the Bactrians and Scythians,
with the extensive regions inhabited by the Syrians, the Armenians, and
the Cappadocians; and by this conquest a tract of country extending from
Bithynia on the Pontic Sea to the coast of Syria on the Mediterranean was
reduced to subjection.”
The evidence seems to be clear that some of the nations with whom the
Egyptian armies fought, may be identified with the principal Asiatic
nations still inhabiting the borders of the Caspian.
“On six of the Phonetic Ovals (published by Champollion) are the names of
the heads of the various countries conquered by Sesostris. On one appears
the generic name of the Scheti (spelt Sh.e.d.te); on the second, the
generic name of the sons of Mosech or the Muscovites, spelt precisely as
in the Hebrew (M.s.ek); thirdly, the people of Arakan, spelt very nearly
as that name is sounded (as, for example, Ar-rk-k-a-n); fourthly, the
people of Casan (spelt C-a-s-n); the fifth is probably Susa, but the
middle vowel is omitted, and it stands S-se.”(119)
Casan is a Tartar province, conquered by Russia in the 16th century.
The Scheti, according to Champollion’s opinion, were the Scythians of the
classical nations, the modern Tartars.(120)
A conflict between the Egyptians and the Scheti or Scheta forms the
subject of one of the most interesting Egyptian battle-pieces, which
displays in a striking point of view the high military discipline of the
Egyptians. Mr. Wilkinson describes the Scheti “as a nation who had made
considerable progress in military tactics, both with respect to manœuvres
in the field and the art of fortifying towns, some of which they
surrounded with a double fosse. It is worthy of remark, that in these
cases the approach to the place led over a bridge; and the sculptures
acquainting us with the fact are highly interesting, as they offer us the
earliest indication of its use, having been executed in the reign of the
great Ramesis, about 1350 years before our era.”
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
“Their arms were the bow, sword, and spear, and a wicker shield.”
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
“They had some cavalry, but large masses of infantry with a formidable
body of chariots, constituted the principal force of their numerous and
well-appointed army; and if from the manner in which they posted their
corps-de-reserve we may infer them to have been a people skilled in war,
some idea may also be formed of the strength of their army from the
numbers composing that division, which amounted to 24,000 men, drawn up in
three close phalanxes, consisting each of 8,000.”
Mr. Wilkinson notices three other nations among those who were connected
with the Egyptians either as enemies or allies, viz. “The Rebo,” “The
Shairetana,” and “The Tok-kari.”
The Rebo were among the most formidable enemies of the Egyptians. They
were distinguished by a light complexion, blue eyes, an aquiline nose, and
a costume very like that of Persia or Parthia, indicating a northern as
well as an Asiatic country; they wore earrings, and their chiefs sometimes
tattoed their arms and legs; they appear as the type of Asia in some of
the Egyptian drawings. Their chief weapons were a long straight sword,
with a sharp point, and a bow. Champollion concluded the Rebo to have been
the Parthians.
Mr. Wilkinson expresses himself unable to trace the Shairetana and the
Tok-kari; I conceive, however, that their names and other circumstances
serve to identify them with the Sogdians or Bucharians and the Turks,
whose territories are intermingled. The name of the Tok-kari obviously
resembles that of the Turks, and, according to Adelung, the Bucharians,
from their dwelling in Towns, &c., are called Sarti, a name resembling
that of the Shairetana. The Shairetana and Tok-kari revolted together
against the Egyptians, and were again subdued. The Tok-kari used waggons
with two solid wheels, and drawn by two oxen, which appear to have been
placed in the rear as in the Scythian or Tartar armies. Their women are
seen carrying off their children by drawing them into these waggons at the
moment of defeat. These are traits characteristic of the Tartar race, of
which the Turks are a branch. These nations were occasionally allied with
the Egyptians both against the Scheti and the Rebo, which implies that
their country was intermediate between that of the Parthians and the
Tartars.
The Egyptian illustrations of Scriptural incidents and localities are of
the highest interest:
Champollion found a portrait of a Hebrew, with all the features of the
race, in a group consisting of the chiefs of thirty conquered nations,
whom an Egyptian King is depicted dragging to the feet of the Theban
Trinity. The name of the Egyptian King was phonetically written “Shishak,”
the name of the Jewish captive was written “Joudaha Melek,” King of Judea
or the Jews. (See I. Kings, 14 chap. 25 and 26 v.) This picture, as Mr.
Tattam(121) observes, may be considered as a commentary on this chapter!
Portraits of Jews are frequent amongst the Egyptian remains. “The costume
of these Jews is always the same. They wear their black bushy hair
occasionally bound by a red fillet; but sometimes they wear hats not
unlike the hats dramatically assigned to the Jews of the dark ages. They
wear sandals, the military petticoat or philibeg, a baldric crossing one
shoulder, a girdle, to which is attached a short sword or dagger, and when
engaged in warlike operations, having the upper part of the body covered
with a defensive coat, either of leather or armour, and wearing above the
whole a tippet like the cape of a great coat. Independent of Phonetic
language a mere glance at their lineaments shows that they are Jews!”(122)
The early development of the vast political power and high civilization of
this extraordinary people corroborates the conclusion, that the origin of
the Egyptian nation must be referred to a period sufficiently remote to
render it extremely improbable that a close specific resemblance should
have continued to exist between their language and those of the countries
from which the first population of Egypt may have emigrated. This
inference does not militate against the supposition that Egypt may have
been first colonized from the contiguous Semetic or Syro-Phœnician regions
of Judæa and Arabia.(123)
The literature of ancient Egypt forms a treasure as yet but imperfectly
explored. “We possess,” says Dr. Lepsius, Hieratic MSS. as far back as the
flourishing epoch of the eighteenth dynasty, (which began to reign B.C.
1575, i.e. eighty years before the departure of the Israelites,) and it is
probable that this style was in use even earlier. We have MSS. on History,
Astrology, Magic, “_Registres de Comptabilities_,” and especially a great
quantity of MSS. on Funeral matters.
These remains are probably pregnant with information of the profoundest
interest with regard to the early history of mankind! Further inquiries
similar to those conducted by Dr. Lepsius with respect to the phases
through which the Egyptian Tongue has passed, will probably bring to light
numerous proofs of an increasing approximation in its most ancient
specimens to the languages of Asia and also to those of the other regions
of the continent of Africa. Even in the present state of our knowledge, I
may point out that indications are not altogether wanting that the Hebrew
and other Semetic Tongues in some respects appear to form a connecting
link between the Egyptian and other African languages, on the one hand,
and the Sanscrit and other languages, termed Indo-European, on the other.
These indications occur not in the words but in the structure of the
Semetic Tongues.
In explaining the origin of language, I have noticed that the basis or
Root of the Noun and Verb is the same, while the requisite distinction
between the different parts of speech is made by appropriate additions, as
in the instance of the syllable Er, in Build-er.
It may be inferred that all additions now employed grammatically as
prefixes or suffixes were in the first instance used indifferently either
before or after the Root. But we find, in this respect, a marked
difference between the Indo-European and the Egyptian Tongues. In the
former, these grammatical agents are almost invariably placed after, while
in the Egyptian they in some instances follow, and in others precede the
Root. It will be evident, however, that these grammatical forms themselves
are, in numerous important instances, the same in these two Classes of
Tongues, and that it is only the order in which they are placed that is
different. Thus, in forming the feminine from the masculine, the Egyptians
used a prefix, Th, which forms a suffix in the Welsh, as in Son,(124) “A
Brother,” Th-son, “A Sister,” (_Egypt._) Gen-eth, “A Girl,” (_Welsh._)
Again, the Egyptian plural is formed by prefixing N, as in Phe, Heaven,
singular; N Pheou, Heavens, plural, (_Egypt._,) while in many of the
Indo-European tongues plurals are often formed by subjoining N, as in Ox,
Ox-en (_Eng._), Ych, Ych-en (_Welsh_.), &c.
Now in the Hebrew, Chaldee, &c., though suffixes are employed in numerous
instances, formative prefixes are also used, though not so generally as in
the Egyptian, between which language and the Indo-European tongues the
Semetic languages therefore occupy, in this respect, an intermediate
place.
There is, I conceive, pretty distinct evidence that these characteristic
peculiarities of the three classes of Tongues just adverted to are results
of comparatively recent conventional changes. For a proof that the above
noticed formative of the plural was at one time prefixed, as well as
affixed, in the Indo-European Tongues,—see, as regards the Sanscrit, the
word Nara, corresponding with the Egyptian, p. 129;—as regards the Welsh,
see Appendix A, p. 38. On the other hand, Dr. Lepsius’s researches have
furnished me with a decisive example of an approximation in the ancient
Egyptian to the Indo-European method. “In the age of Hieroglyphics,” he
observes, “the feminine termination Th,” above noticed, “always follows,
while in Coptic it always precedes the Noun.”
Changes of this nature may be considered trifling in themselves; but they
will be found to afford an explanation, at once simple and comprehensive,
of the most striking of those features which separate, by differences
supposed to be fundamental, the languages of the Egyptian and
Syro-Phœnician races from those of the other families of mankind. In
grammatical arrangement the African languages are supposed for the most
part to agree with the Egyptian.(125)
In physiological characteristics it has been very distinctly established,
by the interesting researches of Dr. Prichard, that the Egyptian or Coptic
race forms a connecting link between the contiguous Asiatic nations and
the Negroes of the interior of Africa. It is worthy of remark, that
Vater(126) notices the projection of the nether jaw, “Unterkiefer,” as a
characteristic trait of the Jewish nation! It is observable that this is a
point of approximation to the African nations!
“If we may form an idea,” says Dr. Prichard, “of the complexion of the
Egyptians from the numerous paintings found in their temples, and in
splendidly decorated tombs, in some of which the colours are known to be
preserved in a very fresh state, we must conclude that this people were of
a red-copper, or light chocolate colour, and that they resembled the
reddest of the Fúlah and Kafir tribes now existing in Africa. This colour
may be seen in the numerous plates in the ‘Description de l’Egypte,’ and
in the coloured figures given by Belzoni. A similar complexion is
represented on the heads of the cases made of the sycamore-wood, which
answer the purpose of sarcophagi, and in almost all Egyptian figures. This
red colour is evidently intended to represent the complexion of the
people, and is not put on in the want of a lighter paint, or flesh-colour,
for when the limbs or bodies are represented as seen through a thin veil,
the tint used resembles the complexion of Europeans. The same shade might
have been generally adopted if a darker one had not been preferred, as
more truly representing the national complexion of the Egyptian race.(127)
Female figures are sometimes distinguished by a yellow or tawny colour.”
“Speaking of the Copts, Volney says that they have a yellowish, dusky
complexion, neither resembling the Grecian nor Arabian. He adds, that they
have a _puffed visage_, _swoln eyes_, _flat_ nose, and _thick lips_, _and
bear much resemblance to Mulattoes_.” I have already cited Baron Larrey’s
description of the Copts, the principal traits of which are, “a full
countenance, a long aperture of the eyelids—‘coupés en amand,’—projecting
cheek-bones, dilated nostrils, thick lips, and hair and beard black and
crisp. M. Pugnet, an intelligent physician and an ingenious and
discriminating writer, has made an attempt to distinguish the Copts, or
Qoubtes, as he terms them, into two divisions, those whose ancestry has
been intermixed, and partly of Greek and Latin descent, and a class of
purely Egyptian origin. He says that nothing is more striking than the
contrast between the small and meagre Arabs and the large and fine stature
of the Qoubtes. ‘A l’extérieur chêtif et misérable des premières, ceux-ci
opposent un air de majesté et de puissance; à la rudesse de leurs traits,
une affabilité soutenue; à leur abord inquiet et soucieux, une figure très
épanouie.’ ”(128)
A few further examples of the connexion of the Egyptian with other
languages are subjoined. O n h, “A Dwelling,” (_Egypt._,) Wohn-ung,
Wohn-en (_German_), Onh, “To live,” (_Eg._,) Ōn (_Greek._)—Shage, “A Word,
a Discourse,” (_Eg._,) Sage, Sag-en (_German_), Say (_English_). The
“Sagas” of the Gothic nations are venerable Oral traditions!—Hinim,
“Sleep,” (_Eg._,) Heen (_Welsh._)—Eshau, “A Sow, or Swine,” (_Eg._,) Hus
(_Greek_), Sow (_Eng._)—Iri, “To do,” (_Eg._,) a formative expressive of
Action; Aud-ire, “To hear,” Ire, “To go,” (_Lat._)—Ra.ma, “Lofty,”
(_Eg._,) R.ou.m (_Hebrew._)—Phath, “Foot,” (_Eg._,) Pes, Ped-is (_Lat._),
Path (_Eng._)—E h e, “An Ox,” Ehēou, “Oxen,” (_Eg._,) Ych, Ych-en
(_Welsh._)—Ma, “A Place,” (_Eg._,) Ma (_Welsh._)
CHAPTER VI. ON THE CHINESE LANGUAGE.
_High Antiquity of the Chinese Empire and Remains discredited by
Sir William Jones and Adelung. But the Differences between the
Chinese Language and those of Western Asia more ancient than the
peculiarities which distinguish the African Languages from those
of Europe and Western Asia. These Differences not fundamental.
Identity of the Chinese with the Hebrew and with the English and
other European Languages, &c._
Adelung, like Sir William Jones before him, quite discredits the supposed
antiquity of the Chinese Empire and the claims set up by the Chinese to a
high and ancient civilization. The Great Wall, said by their historians to
have been built 240 years B.C., is not mentioned by early writers,
especially Marco Polo, who visited China from the West in 1270. He regards
the scientific knowledge of the Chinese as inferior to that of several
adjoining nations, and Confucius’s morality as nothing better than a
medley of sound opinions, such as any man of strong sense might have
compiled! The materials of their paper are so frail that it is impossible
any of their MSS. can be very ancient, and in the fidelity or knowledge of
their Transcribers he places no confidence! Finally, he views the
infantine character of their language, a feature in which the Chinese are
inferior to the wildest American tribes, as forming in itself a proof of
the absence of a high culture, to which, he maintains, it constitutes an
almost insuperable obstacle.
On the other hand, unfavorable as its characteristics are to the supposed
antiquity and extent of their civilization, he nevertheless considers
these very peculiarities of their language in the light of decisive proofs
of the high antiquity of the Chinese nation, viewed simply as a distinct
branch of the human race.
In the last chapter were discussed the peculiarities of structure which
distinguish the Egyptian and Semetic tongues from those of the
Indo-European class; peculiarities which were shown to consist, not in a
fundamental difference of elements, but simply in various conventional
arrangements of the same elements. This explanation will now be proved to
apply also to the characteristics which distinguish the Chinese from the
principal Asiatic and European languages, with this qualification however,
that these characteristics, as contrasted with those of other classes of
tongues, imply a separation from a parent stock at a much earlier era in
the history of the human species than those which have been noticed in the
last chapter, as distinguishing the Indo-European, Semetic, and Egyptian
languages respectively.
According to Adelung’s lucid analysis, the following are the principal
steps by which language is formed. 1. The first words are vowels, or
sounds produced simply by the opening of the mouth and the emission of the
breath. 2. Next in order are monosyllables, consisting of a vowel and a
consonant preceding, as in P-a. 3. Arise monosyllables, formed of a vowel
between two or more consonants, as in P-a-p. 4. Lastly are constructed
polysyllabic words, formed by a combination into one word of two or more
of the monosyllabic terms.
The African, American,(129) European, and all the Asiatic languages, with
the exception of those spoken in China and the contiguous countries of the
south-west of Asia, display a consummation of all these four stages. The
Chinese exhibits results of the first and second steps of the series only.
In other words, the Chinese may be described not simply as a language
_purely monosyllabic_, but as one in which the _monosyllables are of the
most elementary and infantine character, viz., those which consist of one
consonant and a vowel_ (_as in_ PA). They have no words which have a
second consonant, as in P-A-P.
Having no polysyllables, the Chinese supply their place by a minute
variety in their vowel sounds. They have no grammar:(130) the same word is
at once an adjective, a substantive, and a verb! Affixes and suffixes,
such as occur in give, giv-er, gif-t, are unknown. The modifications of
meaning these forms convey are expressed either by altering the position
of the words or by additional terms. The plural is the same as the
singular; though, to avoid obscurity, in extreme cases the clumsy
expedient of repetition is resorted to, as in Tschin-tschin, “Man-man”
(i.e. Men); or distinct words indicative of number are prefixed, such as
Muen, “Many,” Tschung, “All!”
It was the opinion of Adelung that the Chinese language differed not
merely in its structure, but in its elements, from the other languages of
the human race. He supposed this nation to have sprung from the same stock
as those of western Asia. But their speech he conceives to have been
constructed after the separation.
The peculiar monosyllabic structure of the Chinese seems to justify the
conclusion, that the nations of Europe and western Asia are more nearly
allied in descent to the Negro tribes of the interior of Africa and to the
Indian tribes of America than they are to the Chinese and the nations of
the contiguous countries of the south-west of Asia. But that Adelung’s
conclusion, that the Chinese is a radically distinct tongue is an
erroneous one will now be shown by examples, to which the _peculiar
structure of that language will only serve to give additional_(131)_
force_; for while in most of the following examples the words compared are
essentially the same, the Chinese monosyllables being identical with
Hebrew or European monosyllables, or with terms which partake of that
character, in other instances it will be found that the differences which
occur have been caused solely by the addition of the characteristic
suffixes and affixes of the polysyllabic languages, which are not used in
the Chinese! Thus we have Mu, “A Mouse,” (_Chin._,) Mū-s, Mu-os, Mu
(_Greek_), the root in the latter being the same as in the former; Fo and
Foo Tsin, “A Fa-ther,” (_Chin._,) Moo and Moo Tsin, “A Mo-ther,” (_Chin._)
I shall commence these examples with the Chinese pronouns, most of which
are absolutely identical with those of the polysyllabic languages. This
branch of the comparison will serve to place in a striking point of view
the erroneous nature of the opinion generally received among philologists,
that nations which agree are necessarily more nearly allied than those
which differ(132) in their grammatical forms, the Chinese being found in
this respect to agree in an unequivocal manner with the kindred English
and German, in some of those very points in which they mutually differ
widely!
_Pronouns of the First Person_, “I” and “We.”—Ngan, Ngoo Ngo, “I” and
“We,” (_Chinese._) Iōnga, Egōn, “I,” (_Greek._)
_Pronouns of the Second Person_, “Thou” and “Ye.”—Irr, “Thou” and “Ye,”
(_Chinese._) Ihr, “Ye,” (_German._) Yú, Yŏh, “Thou” and “Ye,” (_Chinese._)
You, “Ye,” (_English._) Yō (_Provincial English_). Eoh (_Anglo-Saxon_),
“Ye.” Nee, Nai, Nyú, “Thou” and “Ye,” (_Chinese._) Ne, “You,” (_Mandans, a
North American Tribe._)
In these instances the English “You” and the German “Ihr” differ totally.
Moreover, in each language separately considered the plural differs
altogether from the singular, which in German is expressed by “Du,” and in
the English by “Thou.” The Chinese, which uses these terms, “Ihr” and
“You,” conjointly and in both numbers, furnishes a satisfactory clue to
these anomalies!
_Pronouns of the Third Person._—E.e, “He,” “She,” “It,” (_Chinese._)
E.ee.a, E.v.e, (_Hebrew._) He, masculine, (_English._) He, feminine,
(_Welsh._)—Peé, “He,” “She,” “It,” also “That,” (_Chinese._) Phe, Ph,
“This,” “That,” (_Hebrew._) Pha or Pe, the article “The,” (_Egypt._)
_Specimens of Chinese Words, identical with equivalent Terms in the
Languages of Europe and Western Asia, &c._
Keuen, “A Dog,” (_Chinese_), Kuōn (_Greek_), Coun (Plural, _Welsh_),
Can-is (_Latin_).—Ma, “A Horse,” (_Chinese_), Morin Mantschu), Mä-hre
(_German_), Ma-re (_English_), Ma-rch (_Welsh_.)—Mu, “A Mouse,”
(_Chinese_), Mu-s, Mu-os Mu (_Greek_), Mu-s (_Latin._)—Lung,(133) “A
Wolf,” (_Chinese_), Lukon (_Greek_), Lloun-og, “A Fox,” (_Welsh._)—Ioanģ,
Iong, Io, “A Sheep,” (_Chinese_), Oin (_Greek_), Oen, “A Lamb,” (_Welsh_),
Oi, Ai, Yi (_Irish._)
Foò “A Father,” Moo “A Mother;” also Foò Tsin “A Father,” and Moó Tsin “A
Mother.” Tsin means “A Relation,” (_Chinese._) The equivalent terms in the
English and other Gothic dialects consist of the Chinese root, and a
distinct suffix (answering the purpose of the separate Chinese word Tsin.)
Fä-der (_Anglo-Saxon_), Fa-ther (_English_), Fa-ter (_German_), Mo-ther,
(English), Mua-ter (_Old high German._)(134)
Nan and Yin, “A Man,” (_Chinese._) Ninetz, “Men,” their national name,
(_Samoieds._) Ninnee Inin, “A Man,” (_Algonquyn Dialects of N. America._)
Nan “A Son,” (_Chinese_,) N.n [Parturio] (_Heb._)—Neang, “A young Lady,”
(_Chinese_,) Non (_Mantschu_,) Nonn-us (_Lat._,) Nun, “Tender,”
(_Chinese._)—Nyu, “A Daughter,” (_Chinese_,) Nea, Feminine, “Young,”
[Juvenis] (_Greek_,) New (_Eng._)—Chan, “To produce, bear,” (_Chinese_,)
Gen-i (_Welsh_,) Genn-ao (_Greek._)—Chuen, “A Boat, or Ship,” (_Chinese_,)
Kahn (_Ger._,) Cymba (_Latin_,) Kumbī (_Greek._)
Chuy, “To blow, The Breath,” (_Chinese_,) Chwa (_Welsh._)—Fe, “Fat,”
(_Chinese_), Fe-tt (_German_,) Fa-t (_English._)—Ho, “Fire,” (_Chinese_,)
Ho-t (_English._) These words Ho-t and Fe-tt seem to have been regularly
formed as past participles from Ho and Fe, the roots preserved in the
Chinese.—Hoo, “To escort,” (_Chinese_,) Hü-ten (_Ger._)—Fan, “To subvert,
Contrary,” (_Chinese_,) Ph.n.e, [To turn, turn out] (_Hebrew_,) Fun, “To
divide,” (_Chinese_,) Fun do, Fin do (_Latin_.)—Gan, “Favor,” (_Chinese_,)
Gönn-en, Gun-st (_German_,) Gynn a (_Swedish_,) c’H.n (_Hebrew_.)—Gaou,
“Proud,” (_Chinese_,) Ga, Ga.ou.e, Ga.ee.oun (_Hebrew_) Gang “Lofty,” Ge
“The Forehead,” Ke “To rise,” Ka.ou “High,” (_Chinese_,) Ga-e, “To rise,”
(_Heb._)—Kang, “More,” (_Chinese_,) Chwaneg (_Welsh_.)—Hae, “A large
River, The Sea,” (_Chinese_,) Aa (_Icelandic_,) Eia (_Ang.-Sax._,) Wy
(_Welsh_.)—Heuen, “To explain,” Heaou “To understand,” Heo “To learn,”
(_Chinese_,) c’Hou.e “To show, explain, declare,” (_Hebrew_,) He-ar
(_Eng._)—Hwō, “Living,” (_Chinese_) c’Hee.a, E.ou.e (_Hebrew_.)—Kwae,
“Prompt, active,” (_Chinese_,) Chwae (_Welsh_.)—Kia “A Family,” Kiwo “A
Nation,” (_Chinese_,) Kiw (_Welsh_,) Gou.e (_Heb._)—Keen, “To see,”(135)
(_Chinese_), Ken (_English_,) Kee, “And,” (_Chinese_,) Kai (_Greek and
Algonquyn Tribes of N. America_,) King “To respect,” (_Chinese_,) Kun-ēō
(_Greek_,) Kwăn, “Fatigued,” (_Chin._,) Gwan (_Welsh_.)—Laou, “Labour,”
(_Chinese_,) La.e (_Hebrew_), La-bor (_Latin_.)—Mae, “To buy,”
(_Chinese_,) Emo (_Latin_.)—Lo, “Green,” (_Chinese_,) L.c’he,
(_Hebrew_.)—Leo, “Small,” Lu, (_Irish_,) Low (_English_.)—Muen, “Many,”
(_Chinese_,) Many (_English_.)—Yaou Yo, “To will, desire,” (_Chinese_,)
Aeō (_Greek_,) Aveo (_Lat._)—Meen, “To dispose,” (_Chinese_,) M.n.e
(_Hebrew_.)—Mien, “The Face,” (_Chinese_,) Mine (_French_,) Mien
(_English_.)—Pew, “Spotted Tiger,” (_Chinese_,) Pie [Colour] (_English_,)
Pei, “To receive,” (_Chinese_,) Piai, “To possess,” (_Welsh_.)—Pin,
“Poor,” Penuria (_Latin_.)—Sae, “To agitate,” (_Chinese_,) Sway
(_English_.)—Saou, “A Brush,” (_Chinese_,) Shoue, “To rub,”
(_Hebrew_.)—Scun, “To inspect,” (_Chinese_,) Sehen (_German_.)—Sha, “To
kill,” (_Chinese_,) Sha.e (_Hebrew._)—Shen, “Good, Pious,” (_Chinese_,)
Sanctus (_Latin_,) Shin, “A Spirit, God,” (_Chinese._)—Shing, “To ascend,”
(_Chinese_,) Scan-deo (_Latin._)—Shwa, “To sport, Play,” (_Chinese_,) Sho
sho (_Hebrew_,) Soo, “To number,” (_Chinese_,) Shou e (_Hebrew._)—Sung,
“To present to,” (_Chinese_,) Schenk-en (_German._)—Sing, “A Star,”
(_Chinese_,) Schein-en, “To shine,” (_German_,) Sun (_English._)—Yun,
“Fog, Cloud,” Ying, “Shadow,” Wan, “Evening,” (_Chinese_,) On.n, “A Cloud,
To cloud over,” (_Hebrew._)—Wang, “To hope.” (_Chinese_,) Chwannawg,
“Desirous,” (_Welsh._)—We, “Taste,” (_Chinese_,) Chwae-th (_Welsh._)
CHAPTER VII. ON THE ORIGIN OF THE AMERICAN TRIBES.
_Identity of the American Tribes with the Nations of the other
Continents. High Mental and Moral qualities of the North American
Indians. Views of Cooper, Du Ponceau, and Catlin. Clear nature of
the proofs derivable from Language of the Identity of the N. A.
Indians with the European and Asiatic Nations. Catlin’s views as
to the Identity of the Mandans, a Tribe of N. A. Indians, with the
Welsh. Union in the Dialects of the N. A. Indians, of Greek, and
other Indo-European and Tartar Inflections, with the Pronouns of
the Hebrew and the Welsh. Close Approximation of these Dialects to
the Greek and other European Tongues, and to the Languages of the
North of Europe and Asia._
That the Tribes of the American Continent are descended from the same
stock as the Asiatic and European nations is a proposition with respect to
which the evidence contained in Appendix A must, I conceive, be felt to be
conclusive when combined with Dr. Prichard’s proofs that the Physiology of
the Human race in different countries is the result of climate and other
external agencies. As regards the mental and moral qualities of the native
American nations, there seems to be no solid ground for the inference
maintained in some quarters that they are a different, because in these
respects an inferior, race. It is impossible to peruse Mr. Catlin’s living
picture of the manners and social habits of the North American Indians
without being deeply impressed with the conviction that these Tribes, both
intellectually and morally, are as highly gifted by nature as those
nations who have inherited the blessings of a refined civilization. That
the same remark applies to the more Southern American populations, such as
the Mexicans and Peruvians, may be shown by an appeal to numerous
considerations. In this place, however, I shall confine my observations to
the Septs generally termed North American Indians, the original
inhabitants of the United States and the regions in the same latitude.
This race of men has been thus described in a celebrated work of fiction,
which owes its chief interest to the vivid portraiture it exhibits of
Indian life and manners.(136)
“It is generally believed that the Aborigines of the American continent
have had an Asiatic origin. There are many physical as well as moral facts
which corroborate this opinion, and some few that would seem to weigh
against it.
“The colour of the Indian, the writer believes, is peculiar to himself,
and while his cheek-bones have a very striking indication of a Tartar
origin, his eyes have not. Climate may have had great influence on the
former, but it is difficult to see how it can have produced the
substantial difference which exists in the latter. The imagery of the
Indian, both in his poetry and his oratory, is Oriental, chastened, and
perhaps improved, by the limited range of his practical knowledge. He
draws his metaphors from the clouds, the seasons, the birds, the beasts,
and the vegetable world. In this, perhaps, he does no more than any other
energetic and imaginative race would do, being compelled to set bounds to
his fancy by experience; but the North American Indian clothes his ideas
in a dress that is so different from that of the African for instance, and
so Oriental in itself as to be remarked. His language, too, has the
richness and sententious fulness of the Chinese. He will express a phrase
in a word, and he will qualify the meaning of an entire sentence by a
syllable; he will even convey different significations by the simplest
inflections of the voice.
“Philologists who have devoted much time to the study, have said that
there were but two or three languages, properly speaking, among all the
numerous tribes which formerly occupied the country that now composes the
United States. They ascribe the known difficulty one people have in
understanding one another to corruptions and dialects.
“The writer remembers to have been present at an interview between two
chiefs of the Great Prairies west of the Mississippi, and when an
interpreter was in attendance who spoke both their languages. The warriors
appeared to be on the most friendly terms, and seemingly conversed much
together, yet, according to the account of the interpreter, each was
absolutely ignorant of what the other said. They were of hostile tribes,
brought together by the influence of the American Government; and it is
worthy of remark that a common policy led them both to adopt the same
subject. They mutually exhorted each other to be of use in the event of
the chance of war throwing either of the parties into the hands of his
enemies. Whatever may be the truth, as respects the root and the genius of
the Indian tongues, it is quite certain they are now so distinct in their
words as to possess most of the disadvantages of strange languages; hence
much of the embarrassment that has arisen in learning their histories, and
most of the uncertainty which exists in their traditions.”
The traits of character embodied in this passage are not those of an
inferior, but of a highly acute and imaginative race!
The Philological objections to the proposition that the North American
Tribes are of Asiatic origin have by many writers been regarded as
insuperable. Du Ponceau, who has given profound attention to the subject,
dwells, 1, On the differences in words among the American languages
themselves; 2, On the failure which he imputes to those writers who have
attempted to identify the Indians with some one individual Asiatic nation,
as the Chinese, the Tartars, or the Jews, &c.; and 3, On the differences
in the Grammars of the North American dialects and those of the languages
of the Old World, which he treats as a conclusive refutation of all
arguments in favour of original unity! Mr. Catlin also lays great stress
on the first of these considerations, viz. the great differences he found
in the words of the dialects of the Tribes he visited.
To every one of these objections the general principles developed in the
previous pages will be found to involve a complete answer. 1. The
differences apparently fundamental in the words of American languages may
be accounted for in the same manner as similar differences in the
languages of the old world (the Gothic and Celtic for example,) have
already been explained, viz. by the tendency to abandon different
synonymes. 2. That attempts to prove a close specific relation between the
North American dialects and any one Asiatic language, such as the Chinese
or the Hebrew, should have failed, was to be expected as a consequence of
the same tendency. 3. Finally, differences of Grammar have been shown to
be fallacious evidence viewed separately and without due regard to other
features of language.(137) Moreover, it will presently appear clearly
that, even as regards the Grammar of the Indian Dialects, Du Ponceau’s
impressions can be distinctly proved to be erroneous, an extended
comparison serving to render manifest the interesting fact that, as
respects the elements of Grammar, these dialects perfectly agree with the
Asiatic and European languages, while in the mode of combining those
elements, they do not differ from those languages more widely than the
latter differ among themselves.
If the ancestors of the American Indians emigrated at a remote period from
the opposite Asiatic Coasts, we have no right to anticipate in their
dialects a complete conformity to any one language of the old world, but
general and varying features of resemblance to several. The kindred
dialects of the same Continent after the lapse of a considerable time do
not exhibit any other kind of resemblance! Now this is the species of
relation which the North American Indian dialects actually display when
compared to the Languages of the Old World!
The chief examples which I have selected as illustrations of this
proposition have been taken from the Algonquyn dialects, the very class
examined by Du Ponceau himself, to which I have added a few corroborative
instances from those of the tribes of the regions to the west of the
Mississippi which have been lately described by Mr. Catlin. The dialects
termed Algonquyn by Du Ponceau were formerly spoken by numerous tribes
who, though not the sole inhabitants, were originally spread through the
whole of the present territory of the United States, including the “Lenni
Lenapé,” the “Chippeways,” and other powerful septs.
With regard to this class of Indian Dialects I propose to show: 1. That as
regards Words they bear a close resemblance to a great variety of Asiatic
and European languages. 2. That their grammatical peculiarities, in like
manner, combine those of various languages of the Old World, as in the
instance of their Verbs and Pronouns, in which the inflections of the
Greek and other Indo-European Tongues are found united with separate
Pronouns identical with those common to the Welsh on the one hand and the
Hebrew and its kindred Semetic dialects on the other.
_Words from the North American Indian Dialects of the Algonquyn Class
compared with analogous Terms in Asiatic and European Languages._
Man ittou, “The Deity, a Spirit,” (_Ind._,(138)) Mouno he ka, “Ghosts,”
(_Mandan_,(139)) Manes, “The Spirits of the Dead,” (_Latin_,) Manus, “The
Mind,” (_Sanscrit_,) Mēn, “The Mind,” (_Greek_,) Mens, Ment-is (_Latin_),
Pata-maw-os, “The Deity,” from Pata-maw-an, “To adore,” (_Ind._,)
Poth-ēmenai, “To seek, or pray to,” (_Doric_,) for Poth-ein (_Greek_),
Peton, “To worship,” Peta, “A Prayer,” (_Old High German_,) Bet-en, Bitte
(_German_); see, as to N’iou and Nioueskou, two remarkable words for “The
Deity,” (_Ind._,) pages 22, 23, 24. For names of the Heavenly Bodies, see
Appendix A.
“Father,” Ooch, Oss (_Ind._), Ozha (_Sclavon._), Otze (_Dalmatian_), Wosch
(_Lusatian_), Otzie (_Bohemian_), Nosa (_Ind._), Niza, Niesee
(_Samoieds_).
“Mother,” Anna (_Ind._), Ana (_Turkish_), Anya (_Hungarian_), Nanna
(_Ind._), Nain(140) (_Welsh_), Ningé (_Ind._), Naing (_Irish_), Nik,
Nêkaoui (_Ind._), N.k.be(141) (_Hebrew_).
“A Woman,” Panum, Phanem (_Ind._), Banen (_Cornish_), Been (_Welsh_), Pin,
“A Female,” applied to animals, (_Chinese_.)
“A Girl,” Kan-isswah (_Ind._), Gen eez (_Pers._), Nunk-shoué, Nunk(142)
(_Ind._), Neang (_Chin._), Non (_Mantschu_).
“Husband,” Nap-é, Nap eem (_Ind._), Nub-o, Nuptiæ (_Lat._), Nuptials
(_Eng._)—“Husband,” Weew-ehsa, Wasuk (_Ind._), “Wife,” Weewo, Weowika
(_Ind._), “Marriage,” Wiwaha (_Sanscrit_), Wife (_Eng._)
“A little Child,” Awusk, Awash ish (_Ind._), “A Child,” Watsah
(_Sanscrit_), “Young,” Wuski (_Ind._), “A Youth,” Was or Gwas (_Welsh_).
“High,” Hockunk (_Ind._), Hoch, Höhe, Hoheit (_German_), High, Height
(_Eng._), Hitké(143) (_Iroquois_).
“The Earth,” Hacki, Ki, Ackour (_Ind._), Ge (_Greek_), Ager (_Latin_),
Agr-os (_Greek_).
“Foot,” Sit (_Ind._), St.o, “I stand,” (_Latin_).
“Good,” Wuilit (_Ind._), Wohl (_Ger._), Weal, Well, Wealth (_Eng._),
Ee.o.l, “To profit, benefit,” (_Hebrew_).
“To fight,” Pachg-amen(144) (_Ind._), P.g.ee (_Heb._), Pug-no (_Latin_).
“To give,” Mekan (_Ind._), M.gn (_Hebrew_).
“Night,” Nukon (_Ind._), Nux (_Greek_), Nox (_Latin_), Noc (_Polish_), Noc
(_Hungarian_).
“Blood,” M’huk, Mokum (_Ind._), Mucum, Mucus (_Latin_).
“Cold,” Kisina (_Ind._), Kuisne, “Ice,” (_Irish_,) K.sh.a, “To harden,
stiffen,” “A Cucumber,(145) from its cooling properties,” (_Hebrew_).
“Sleep,” Nipu, Nip-awin, “To sleep,” Nupp (_Ind._), Nap (_Eng._), Hup-nos
(_Greek_), Nim pamino, “I sleep,” (_Ind._), N.m., N.ou.m.e (_Hebrew_).
“To touch,” Aman damaog-an (_Ind._), Man-us (_Latin_).
“Man,” Nin (_Ind._), Ninetz “Men,” (_Samoieds_,) a diminutive race in the
North-east of Asia. The national name they have given to themselves is the
above word, Ninetz “Men.”
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
I shall add a few further illustrations from the specimens of the
languages of the Indian Tribes to the West of the United States, which
have been published by Mr. Catlin.
“Spirits, Ghosts,” Mouno he ka (_Mandan_,)—and see above, Manitto, “A
Spirit,” (_Ind._)—Manes, “The Spirits of the Dead,” (_Latin_).
“Bad,” Khe cush (_Mandan_), Kakos (_Greek_).
“A Bear,” Mah to (_Mandan_), Matto (_Sioux_), Medve (_Hungarian_), Medvid
(_Sclavonian_), Metzwetz (_Lusatian_), Koonoghk (_Riccaree_), Chiung
(_Chinese_).
“Dog,” Shonka (_Riccaree_), Shunah (_Sanscrit_), Shun (_Armenian_), A
meeteh (_Blackfeet_), Meda (_Taraikai_, _North-east of Asia_), Madaidh
(_Irish_).
“A Raven,” Kaka (_Mandan_), To kah ka (_Riccaree_), Kaka (_Sanscrit_).
“River,” Pass ahah (_Mandan_). See Appendix A. p. 78.
“Ears,” Ookah nay(146) (_Tuskaroras_), Ucho (_Sclavonian_), Ochtowaga
(_Shawannos_), Ohto kiss (_Blackfeet_), Ōta (_Greek._) See p. 73, Appendix
A.
“Hand,” Onka (_Mandan._) See Appendix, page 69. Ohahna (_Tuskaroras._)
See Appendix, p. 68.
“Head,” Otahra (_Tuskaroras_), Otri (_Ashantees Negroes_), Utieri (_Aminas
Negroes._)
“Nose,” Pahoo (_Mandan_), Pei Pi (_Chinese_), Pah.soo (_Sioux_), Ph.o.e,
“To Breathe,” (_Hebrew_), Phusa-o, “To Breathe,” (_Greek._)
Want of space, and the extensive nature of the evidence contained in
Appendix A, alone deter me from greatly multiplying these examples.
2. As regards Grammatical forms:
Nothing can be more erroneous than the inference that the North American
Indian dialects differ in this respect from those of Asia and Europe. In
the previous comparison numerous examples present themselves in which the
same words unequivocally exhibit at once both the roots and the
inflections of words belonging to the languages termed Indo-European, as
in _Patam-awan_, _Patam-awos_, _Kis-ina_, _M. huk_, _Mok-um_, _Khe-cush_,
_Nimp-amino_, &c.!
These are not isolated instances. I do not hesitate to affirm that it may
be shown by means of the very terms he has selected for examination, that
those North American Indian dialects which Du Ponceau has analyzed, abound
in similar examples! That the same remark is true with regard to the
dialects of the Western Tribes described by Mr. Catlin, is a proposition
which will now be illustrated in a remarkable instance!
Among the tribes with whom he resided this writer has especially noticed a
highly interesting sept, the Mandans, in whose dialect he has pointed out
a variety of instances of close resemblance to the Welsh, which he has
left to the judgment of those who are conversant with that language. On
this subject I conceive there cannot be any difference of opinion among
those who are vernacularly acquainted with the venerable tongue of the
Cymry. Of the Mandan terms selected by Mr. Catlin (which are subjoined
below), the majority must be admitted to present plain and unequivocal
features of resemblance, or rather of identity, to the equivalent Welsh
terms.
Now, it will be seen that of these(147) examples of affinity the greater
number consist of terms which belong exclusively to the province of
Grammar!
English. Mandan. Welsh. Other Asiatic
And European
Languages.
I. Me. Me. Me (_Latin_ and
_Eng._), Eme
(_Greek._)
You. Ne. Chwe. Nee,
(_Chinese._)
He. E. E. E.ee.a, E.ou.e,
or E.v.e, “He,
She, It,”
(_Heb._)
She. Ea. E, Hee. Ea, “She,”
(_Latin._)
It. Ount. Hooyant, “They” Onuh, “It, Him,
(Plural.)(148) Her,”
(_Turkish._)
They. Eonah, (Onúh Nhou, “They,” E.n.e, “They,”
ha, Honúh ha, Hyny, “Those.” (_Hebrew_),
“They,” Oona, “They,”
_Iroquois also “He, She,
Dialects._ It,” (_Mixed
Indian Dialects
of Asia_.)
Ainah, Ont,
Ent, (_Endings
of the third
person plural
of
Indo-European
Verbs._)(149)
We. Noo. Nee. Nōi (_Greek_),
Nou, Nc’hnou
(_Hebrew._)
No, or, There Megosh.(150) Nagoes, Nage.
is not.
Head. Pan. Pen.
The Great Maho peneta. Mawr(151)
Spirit. Penaether
Yysprid Mawr.
By some of our countrymen it has been sanguinely maintained that the
descendants of a body of Welsh, who left their country under Prince Madoc
in the twelfth century, may be still traced by affinities of language
among the North American Indian Tribes. Struck by the resemblances he has
detected, Mr. Catlin has been led to favour the same conclusion, and to
suggest that the Mandans may probably be shown to be the descendants of
the lost Cambrian Colony!
But the examples selected by this writer, however creditable to his
accuracy and research, do not tend, as he suggests, to prove the existence
of a specific connexion between the Welsh and the Mandans! This will be
evident from the words contained in the right-hand column (which have been
added by the author of this work). An examination of the whole comparison
will serve to show clearly, that though in most of the instances he has
noticed the resemblance displayed by the Mandan to the Welsh is a close
one, in many of them it displays an equally close affinity to the Latin
and Greek, &c., while in some—this North American Indian dialect totally
differs from the Welsh tongue, and at the same time agrees with—other
languages of the Old World. Many of those examples which precede the
Comparison are also illustrations of the principle that the Mandan, like
other North American Indian dialects, exhibits a general resemblance to
all, and not a specific relation to any one of the Asiatic and European
tongues. Thus Khe cush, “Bad,” which is identical with the Greek, but is
totally unlike the Welsh, is a Mandan word!
The prevalent theory, that there exists a group of Indo-European languages
and nations—peculiarly connected among themselves—peculiarly isolated from
others—will, I conceive, be found to be fallacious; and what is highly
remarkable, distinct proofs of its fallacy, as will presently be seen, are
derivable from the dialects of the North American Tribes!
The writers by whom this theory has been maintained have overlooked, on
the one hand, the numerous points of resemblance which connect the
Indo-European languages with other Tongues; while, on the other hand, they
have also overlooked the numerous points of difference which they mutually
display. On a close investigation it will be evident that it is only in
the basis of their Grammars that any of the ancient languages of Asia and
Europe, even those which are very nearly related, agree; they do not
display an identity of Grammatical forms! Compare, for example, the
inflections of the Verbs in the Latin and the Greek, and the numerous
points of difference which they exhibit in almost every tense, combined
with mere partial coincidences. That these remarks are equally true of the
relation displayed by the North American Indian dialects compared to those
of the Old World will be apparent from the following examples, in which it
will be manifest that these dialects in their basis agree with, and in
their inflections and details only partially differ from, the Asiatic and
European languages!
_Present Tense of a Verb in two Dialects of the Algonquyn Class._
“Chippeway” Dialect. “Lenni Lenape” Dialect.
(Root) NOND—“Understand.” (Root) PEND—“Understand.”(152)
_Singular._ _Singular._
N’-nond-OM. N’-pend-AMEN.
“I understand.” “I understand.”
K’-nond-OM. K’-pend-AMEN.
“Thou understand-est.” “Thou understand-est.”
---- -Nond-om. ---- -Pend-amen.
“He understand-s.” “He understand-s.”
_Plural._ _Plural._
N’-nond-AM-IN. N’-pend-AMEN-EEN.
“We understand.” “We understand.”
K’-nond-AM. K’-pend-AM-OHUMO.
“Ye understand.” “Ye understand.”
---Nond-UM-ÔG. ---Pend-AMEN-OWO.
“They understand.” “They understand.”
It will be observed that the inflections of the Algonquyn Verb, indicative
of persons (corresponding to those in Leg-o, Leg-is, Leg-it, _Latin_), are
“Om and Amen.” In another form of the Algonquyn Verb, “Amo” is also used.
These forms, “Om, Amo, Amen,” are the common inflections of the first
person in all the Indo-European languages. (See Dr. Prichard on the
Eastern Origin of the Celtic Nations, pp. 130, 136.) In the North American
Indian dialects it will be seen that they occur in all the three persons.
There are instances of the same kind in the Indo-European Tongues for the
Doric Greek Infinitive as in Poth-emen-ai, “To desire,” and the Greek
Passive Participle as in Tupt-omen-os, Tupt-omen-e, “Struck,” are examples
of the application of “Amen or Omen” to any individual of the Human Race,
in other words, _to all the three persons_!
This inflection “Amen” exists in the Tartar dialects in the first person,
as in Bol-amen, “I am,” Bol-asin, “Thou art,” &c.
The following are examples of its use for the first person in the Greek:
_Singular._ _Plural._
_Amen_, used as an Inflection _Amen_, used as an Inflection
for “I.” for “We.”
_E-tupt_-OMĒN, “I was struck.” _Tupt_-OMEN, “We strike.”
_Tupt-oi_-MĒN, “Would that I
were struck.”
Ē-MĒN, “I had been.” Ē-MEN, “We were.”
These examples will serve to illustrate the proposition that in
inflections and other grammatical details the North American Indian
dialects partially coincide with individual Indo-European languages in the
same manner as those languages partially agree among themselves! It
remains to be pointed out that where these two groups of tongues differ,
the differences are such as time might have produced, and that they have
the same basis in common.
“Om, Amo, Amen,” are according to Dr. Prichard, pronouns confused with the
verb. It is an interesting fact, that “Amo”(153) is actually used as the
separate pronoun of the third person “He” in the dialect of the
“Blackfeet,” one of the N. American Indian Tribes to the west of the
Mississippi visited by Mr. Catlin! Now, as all pronouns were
originally(154) nouns, names for a “Human Being,” (see p. 13,) words of
this class must have been in the first instance applied indifferently to
all the three Persons. But in the course of time—1, In some languages
different nouns were appropriated to different Persons,—the most common
noun being applied to the First; (this accounts for the occurrence of “Amo
Om Amen,” probably forms of the most primitive(155) noun—in the first
Person of the Indo-European languages!)—2, In other tongues supplementary
pronouns were used to mark the requisite distinction of Persons, the most
common nouns being still used agreeably to previous habit,—(though no
longer of practical service)—in combination with the verb; (this is the
case in the Algonquyn dialects in which the same inflection is repeated in
all the three persons, and the requisite distinction of persons is made by
means of pronoun prefixes or supplementary pronouns, a distinction which,
in the Greek, &c., is made by varying the final inflections or original
pronouns, as in “Tupt-oi-mēn, Tupt-oi-o,” &c.)(156)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
The pronoun prefixes of these North American Indian dialects, which as
previously intimated, are common to the Welsh and the Hebrew, and other
Semetic tongues remain to be noticed.
ALGONQUYN PRONOUN PREFIXES.
(See previous specimens of Algonquyn Verbs.)
N’ “I” and “We.”
This is an abbreviated form used in conjunction with the verb as a prefix.
The pronoun in full is Ni Nin “I,” Ninou “We.” Both the pronoun itself and
the abbreviated form in which it is used as a prefix, occur in the Hebrew
in which the latter is used as a suffix!
This Algonquyn pronoun is identical with an Algonquyn word for “A Man,”
which, it will be observed, renders the proofs of affinity between the
Semetic and Algonquyn dialects in this instance complete.
Algonquyn. Semetic. Welsh.
“Man.” “I,” or “Me.” “I,” or “Me.”
Anini.(157) A.nee, (_Heb._) Innai.
A.n.a, (_Arabic._)
Ini. Innai.
N-nin.
“I,” or “Me.”
Nin.
Ni.(158) Nee, (_Heb._)
N’.
“We.” “We.” “We.”
A.n.ou, Ni.
A.n.c’h.n.ou.
Nin-ou. N.c’h.n.ou, (_Heb._) Nyni.
Nin-owin. N.h.h.n, (_Arabic._) Nyninnou.
K’, “Thou” and “Ye.”(159)
This is also an abbreviation, the Pronoun in full is Ki, K-in, K-il,
“Thou;” Kin-owa, and Kil-ou, “Ye.”
Algonquyn. Semetic. Welsh.
“Thou, Thine.” “Thee, Thy.”
K’. C’. (_Heb._)
Kee. C’.ee. (_Heb._)
“Ye, Yours.” “Ye.”
K’.
Ki. Chwi.
Ki-nowa. C-oun. C-n.
(_Chald._) C-m.
(_Heb._)
Kil-ou.
Du Ponceau notices another grammatical feature in which it is clear,
though he was unconscious of that fact, that these North American Indian
dialects form a connecting link between the Semetic and Indo-European
languages. “We find,” he observes, “many Nouns substantive with M prefixed
in such a way as to form an integral part of the words.”
This is a Semetic mode of forming a Noun from a Root! In Latin, Nouns are
formed from Roots by the same Letter placed at the end of words, as in
Regn-um, a mode of which we have also had an example in the Algonquyn
dialects, in the words M’-huk, Mok-um!
Where long intervals of time have elapsed, it is in all cases difficult to
discriminate between the proofs of a general and remote, and those of a
near and specific relation. Still I conceive the previous examples tend,
in some measure, to render it probable that there is a closer affinity
between the North American Indians and the inhabitants of Northern Asia
and of Europe, especially the Russians, Hungarians, and other nations
located in its Northern and Western Regions, than exists between these
American Septs and the inhabitants of Southern Asia. Should this
proposition be confirmed by further investigation, it will be found to be
in unison with Adelung’s conclusion, that the route by which the first
Colonists of Europe came from Central Asia lay through the Steppes which
separate the Chinese and Russian Empires. The Nomade Hordes of these vast
plains,—the great “Officina Gentium,”—were probably the parent Septs of
all or most of the European nations on the one hand, and of the
populations of the North-east of Asia and of the opposite American coasts
on the other!
Of the general proposition, that the American Tribes and the Nations of
the Old World are descended from the same Parent Stock, I conceive the
evidence adduced in the previous pages will be deemed to be conclusive.
APPENDIX A. ANALYTICAL COMPARISON OF SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT WORDS IN
THE AFRICAN LANGUAGES WITH THE ANALOGOUS WORDS IN THE LANGUAGES OF ASIA,
EUROPE, AND AMERICA.
_This Comparison will serve to show:_
1. The connexion between the Languages of the Negro population of the
Middle of AFRICA with those of the races in the North and South of AFRICA
who differ from the Negroes in Physiognomy, Colour, and other Physical
qualities.
2. The connexion between the Languages of every part of AFRICA with those
of ASIA, EUROPE, and AMERICA.
3. The fundamental identity of the Languages of the four great divisions
of the Globe.
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Oue ini and Ou
oini, Luminary
Effulgence.
[Probably connected
with “Ooh” Glory,
“Eoohu” Day.]
(_Egyptian._)
2. R. Ou oein, to Roongeh, “Sun.”(160)
diffuse Light,
[Illuminare.]
(_Egypt._)
3. I mine, “Day.”
4.
5. Ra, Re, Sun.
(_Egypt._)
6.
7. Hor, “Horus,” the Huer, Day.
God of Day.
(_Egypt._)
8. Horambe, Moon.
9.
10.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. O . een . n, Eye. Wawn or Gwawn, “A
(_Heb._) Wang, quick darting of
“Light emitted from rays, (Dr. Owen
a body.”(_Chinese._) Pughe’s Dict.) The
Dawn.” (_Welsh._)
2. Ee . ou . m
“Day,”(_Heb._)
[Probably from
“Eoohu” Day,
(_Egyptian,_) and
the suffix “M,”
which in Hebrew
forms nouns from
roots, like the
English suffix “er”
in Mak-er.(161)]
3. Emee . n
“Day.”(_Greek._)
4. Arou, Behold! Ora-o, to see.
(_Chald._) R.a.e, to (_Greek._)
see. (_Heb._)
5. Re, Moon, Re alt,
Star. (_Irish._)
6. Ur, Fire, Ur-o. (_Latin._) Uru, Day.
(_Kurd._) Hur, Fire, (_Aymarans, S. A._)
and Or, Day.
(_Armenian._)
7. Huere, Sun. Huarassi, Sun and
(_Zend._) Day. (_Omaguans, S.
A._)
8. Hora, Time,
(_Greek,_) an Hour,
(_Latin._)
9. A . ou . r, Aurora, the Dawn.
Light, Daylight. (_Latin._)
(_Heb. & Chaldæ._)
10. Arpi, Sun.
(_Armenian._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Wurabe, Day.
(_Nubia._)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. Kammer, Ungmar,
Moon.
7. Re, the Sun, as
above.
8. Iri, “Eye.”(162) Iirri, “Sun”
The symbol of
Osiris, the God of
Day.
9. Iris, the Dawn.
(_Egypt._)
10. Wurrhy, “Moon.” Uhaaire, and Ver,
(_Abyss._) [Compare “Moon.”
Wurabe, “Day,”
above.] (_Nubian._)
11. La, “Fire.” Leaw, “Fire.”
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Or, Day. Wawr, or Gwawr, the Ourhenha, Day.
(_Armenian._) Dawn. (_Welsh._) (_Hurons, N. A._)
Awringo, Sun
(_Finnish._)
2. A.ou.r, Light,
&c., as above; Also
with m prefix—
3. M . A . ou. r, An
instrument or source
of Light, applied to
the Sun and Moon.
(_Heb._)
4. Mihira, Sun.
(_Sanscrit._)
5. Mar, Sun.
(_Abassian._)
6. N. Mar, Sun.
(_Affghan._)
7. Iru, Sun.
(_Korea._)
8. Eiere, Day.
(_Zend._) [Compare
Yere, Moon,
(_Samoied_) below.]
9. Iris, the Rainbow.
(_Latin._)
10. Wurra, Moon. Wiri, Yere, and
(_Sumbava._) Irri, Moon.
(_Samoied._)
11. Lohe, Flame. Hello, Fire.
Lo-dern, “To Burn.” (_Runsienes, N. A._)
(_German._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Lo, “Day.”
2.
3. Lp.s.h, “Flame.” Lelaffu, “Fire.”
4. Lopsh, “To Burn.” Leetshaatsi, “Sun.”
(_Egypt._)
5. Lataa, “Sun.” See
Lo, La, above.
6. La, “Fire.” Lo, Leaw, Fire, as
“Day,” as above. above. Also Lilo,
Fire.(163)
7. Lelegh, Day.
8. Eluk wee, Heaven.
9. See Lelegh, “Day,”
as above.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Lo, and La, “Day.” Olo, Sun and Day.
(_Irish._) (_Vilellans, S. A._)
2. Hallo Allo, a
Day. (_Corea._)
3.
4. L.e.b.e, “Flame.” Licht. (_German._)
L.e.b, “To burn.” Light. (_English._)
(_Hebrew._) L.e.t, Lo-dern, “To burn.”
“Flame,” “To flame, (_German._) [See
burn.” (_Heb._) Lohe, above.]
5. Hallo Alo, a Day.
(_Coriac._)
6. Olo, Sun and Day.
(_Vilellans, S. A._)
Ele le dun, Flame.
(_Arowacks._)
7. Uolok, Day.
(_Esquim._)
8. El eek, (_Nootka
Sound_,) and Hello,
Fire, (_Runsienes,
N. A_.) Ali-gega,
Sun. (_M. Baya_,
extreme south of S.
A.)
9. Lux, Light.
(_Latin._) Licht.
(_German._) Lluched,
Lightning.
(_Welsh._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1.
2. Liklo, Ames-ligo,
“An Eye.”
3.
4. Eli-ang, the Sun.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9. Eli-ang, the Sun, as
above.
10.
11.
12. Lelangu, Sun.
13. Lainch, and
Lainghitsi, Heaven.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Lochatai, “He Llygad, “An Eye.”
sees.” _Sanscrit._) (_Welsh._)
2. Look-eth.
(_English._)
3. E.l. To shine. Eel-ios, the Sun.
E.l.l. To shine (_Greek._)
brightly.
4. E.ee.l.l.
Lucifer. (_Hebrew._)
5. Hailih, and Hāil, the Sun. Gra-_haulai_, Sun.
Hailihs, the Sun. (_Welsh._) Hell, (_Abipones._) Hello,
(_Sanscrit._) Bright. (_German._) Fire. (_Runsienes,
N. A._)
6. Hallo, Alo, a Olo, Sun.
Day. (_Coriac._)
7. Ali, Day. Allit, Moon.
(_Moluccan._) (_Vilellans, S. A._)
8. Eel-ios, the Sun.
(_Greek._)
9. Alank, a heavenly
Luminary, or Star.
(_Algonquyn
dialects, N. A._)
10. Alak, a Star.
(_Assanskians._)
11. Alagon, a Star.
(_Kotowskians, N.
Asia._)
12. Lun, Day. Lunus. Luna.
(_Sirjanian & (_Latin._) Luan,
Permian._ Moon. (_Irish._)
13. Languin, Heaven.
(_Moluccan._) [Also,
in the same
language, Ali, Day.
Compare El-iang,
above.]
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1.
2. Kalla, Coll, Moon.
3. N jellauma(164), Woelau. Volan, Moon.
Day. _Phellata
dialect._
4. Leoure, Moon.
(_Fulah dialect._)
5.
6. Liulu, Moon.
(_Phellata._)
7.
8.
9. Hyalla, Heaven. Ellu, Iulo, I ewel,
Heaven.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Gailgen, Moon. Gealach, Moon. Igaluk, Moon.
(_Coriac._) Glauh, (_Irish._) (_Kadjaks_, extreme
Moon. (_Sanscrit._) N.W. of _N.A._)
2. Killa, Quilla, Moon.
(_Quichuans, S.A._)
3. Jwala, Light, Gwawl, or Wawl,
Flame. (_Sanscrit._) Light. (_Welsh._)
4. Lloer, Moon.
(_Welsh._) Laor,
Moon. (_Armorican._)
5. Glauh-r, Moon.
[Formed from Glauh,
Moon, above, by
“Sandhi.”]
(_Sanscrit._)
6. Liu, Colour.
(_Welsh._) Llei-ad,
Moon. (_Welsh._)
[The double _Ll_
gives to the word a
sound nearly the
same as _Ch_leiad.]
7. Klaida, Klaidu,
Moon, (_Sanscrit._)
[This, and several
of the previous
Sanscrit words, have
been compared with
the Welsh by Dr.
Prichard.]
8. Koilak, Heaven. Killak.
(_Tchugassians_, (_Greenland._)
N.E. of _Asia_, and Killock, Heaven.
N.W. of _America_.) (_Kadjaks._)
9. Igalack Moon, as
above. (_Kadjaks._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Serapis, or Sorohb, Sun.
Soropis, the God of
the Sun, the same as
Osiris. (_Egypt._)
2. Scharappa,(165) Sorrie, Sun.
“Moon.” (_Berber &
Dongolan._)
3. Osiri, Osira, Surrie, Sore, Sun.
(Osiris), believed
to be the God of the
Sun (_Egypt._)
4. Soroka,(166) Day.
5. Assara, Moon.
6. Osran, Osseram,
Osseramme, Moon.
7. A-un, Sun. [See this
word more fully
illustrated in
another part of this
Analysis.]
8. Antu, a Day.
9. Andru, Day.
10. Omma Ongma, “Moon.”
11.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Sh . r ph, to
burn, a
Conflagration. S . h
. r ph . e . m,
“Seraphs.” Sh.r.b,
to burn, scorch.
Ze.r, to shine
brightly.
2. Ts. e. r, a Sêr, Stars.
Light, Noon. (_Welsh._)
(_Hebrew._)
3. Surya, the Indian
God of the Sun. His
orb personified.
(_Sanscrit._)
4. Scorch. (_English._)
5. Sārā, “Moon.” Sêr, Stars.
(_Syrian_, _Mongol_, (_Welsh_, as above.)
& _Calmuck_.)
6.
7. Ano, Day. (_Caraibs,
S. A._)
8. Antu Antú, Sun, Day.
(_Araucan, S. A._)
9. “Indra,” the Inti, Indi, Sun. (In
Indian God of Day, several other
Diespater. dialects of _S.A._)
(_Sanscrit._)
10. Omma, “Eye,” “Face,”
also applied to “Sun
and Moon.”
(_Greek._)
[Schneider.]
11. Mah, the Moon.
_Bucharian._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Mo Moe.
2. Muhta.
3. Mum Muhm, “Eye.”
4. Moomo, “Moon.”
5.
6. Manga, Eye.(167)
7.
8.
9. Mone, “Moon.”
10. Missigh, “Eye.”
11. Massou, Massoo,
Masso, Massorohi,
“Eye.”
12. Masso-androu, Sun,
(i.e. “Eye of Day.”)
[See Androu, Day,
immediately before.]
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Mi-en, “Face.”
(_Chinese &
Burman._)
2.
3.
4.
5. Ee m ee . n, “the
Eye,” or Finger,
(_Heb._) [Similiter
“Per-ception,” now
used for the “Eye,”
but applied
originally to the
hand.]
6.
7. M . n . ee. A
name under which the
idolatrous Jews
worshipped the
“Material Heavens.”
8. Mondy, “Sun.” Manoak, “Sun,” or
(_Permian._) “Moon.” (_Algonquyn
Dialects._)
9. “Moon.” (_English._)
Mēnē, “Month.”
(_Greek._) Mensis,
“Month.” (_Lat._)
Mana, “Moon.”
(_Lapld._)
10. Miezzi, “Eye.”
(_Burman._)
11.
12. Musseete, “Day.”
(_New England._)
Metzli, “Moon.”
(_Mexican._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Massch-ekka, Masso-anru, “Sun.” Masso-anro,
“Sun.” [Apparently Massu, Mass-ge, Masso-anru, “Sun.”
from Missigh,(168) “Fire.”
“Eye,” and Ika, or
Ik, “Fire.” Compare
Massoandrou, “Sun.”
_South Africa._
(_Berbers &
Dongolans._)
2. Masso-am, Sun.
3. Midding, “Moon.” Majava, “Day.”
4. Wussuk, Fire.
5. Wis, Sun.
6.
7. Att-aschi, Sun.
8.
9. Sou Siou, Star.
(_Egypt._)
10. Zu, Sun.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Miaschta, “Moon.” Mesaz, “Moon.”
(_Affghan._) Māsi, (_Sclavonian._) Mis,
“Moon.” “Month.” (_Welsh._)
(_Sanscrit._)
2. M.s.e(169), and
M.j, “Sun.”
(_Georgian._)
3.
4. Us-tus, burnt. Usi Ussi, Fire.
(_Latin._) (_California, N.
A._) Is-chey, Fire.
(_Black Feet
Indians, N. A._)
Neetak _Hasseh_,
Sun. _Hasche_, Moon.
(_Chikkasahs_, N.
A.)
5. Is-chey, Fire.
(_Black Feet, N.A._,
as above.)
6. Ash, Fire. Ass-o, to roast. Assista, Fire.
(_Heb._) Az-er, and (_Latin._) (_Hurons, N. A._)
At-emsch. Azgo.(170)
(_Persian._) (_Gothic._) Ash-es.
(_English._)
7. Aith-ein, to burn.
(_Greek._)
8. At-emsch. Sah, the Sun and
(_Pehli._) Moon. (_Chippeway._)
Ath-eresch, Fire.
(_Zend._)
9. Soo, Moon.
(_Penobscot, N. A._)
10. Suâ, Sun.
(_Muyscans, S.A._,
near the Isthmus of
Darien.)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. So, Heaven.
2.
3.
4. Shah, Flame.
5. Shah shah, Heat.
(_Egypt._)
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. Njite, “Fire.” Nissiek, “Fire.”
(_Phellata._)
11. Ntzai, “Sun.”
12. Gimoihu, Fire.
13. Khem, God of the
Sun. (_Egypt._)
14.
15. T’kaam.
16. Gam, Moon.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Sua, Fire.
(_Basque._)
2. Zee ou, Beams,
Rays, Splendour.
3. Zee, to be Zĕō, to be hot.
bright. (_Heb._) (_Greek._)
4. Sua, Fire.
(_Basque_, as above.
5. Sch un, Sun. Sun. (_English._) Tscan-u, Sun.
(_Mantchu._) Tschaan, Day.
6. Z.k. Flame. Tschan-e, Moon,
(_Kinai Tribe_,
extreme N.W. of _N.
A._) Tcenoe, Moon.
(_Cherokee._)
7. Ts.c’h.e, to Sacche, Sun.
shine. (_Mossans, S.A._)
8. Ts.c’h, clear and Sekkinek, Sun.
parching. (_Greenland, N. A._)
9. Ts.c’h.ts c’h, Siccus, Dry.
violent Heat, or (_Latin._) Sych,
Drought. (_Heb._) Dry. (_Welsh._)
10. N.sh.k, to
kindle, to rise in
flame, to kindle a
fire. (_Heb._)
11. Nitidus, Shining.
(_Latin._)
12. C’h m, Hot,
Heat.
13. C’h.m m, to be
inflamed.
14. C’h.m.n.ee.n, Kaumet, Sun.
Sun Images. (_Heb._)
15. Kaumei, Moon.
(_Greenland._)
16. Gomma, Moon.
(_California._)
Kyem, Moon.
(_Araucan._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Giom, Heaven
2. Chrom.
3. Grom. Giro, Sun
4. Krom, Fire. Karree, Moon. Korro, T’kaukarah, Moon.
(_Egypt._) Moon. Kohri, “Moon.”
5. Grom, “Fire,”
(_Egyptian_, as
above.)
6.
7. Giro, “Sun,” as
above.
8.
9.
10.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Kümar, Heaven.
(_Permian._)
2. C’hr.a, Ch.r.e,
to kindle, burn up.
(_Heb._)
3. Chor. Quarassi, Sun.
(_Persian._) (_Brazil._)
Coaracy, Cuarasi,
Chorschid.
(_Pehli._)
4. Chorschid, Sun. Chiriti, Moon.
(_Ossetian._) (_Caraibs._)
5. G.r.m, Warm. Gorm, to heat, or
(_Pers._) warm. (_Irish._)
“Warm.” (_Eng. &
Germ._) Gwr-ês,
Heat;
6. C’h.r.e, to burn. Greiaw, to burn; Grau-haulai, Sun.
(_Heb._ as above.) Grei-an, i.e. “the Grau-ek, Moon.
Burner,” the Sun. (_Abipones, S. A._)
(_Welsh._)
7. Grian. (_Irish._)
8. Grag, Fire. Gar-akou.
(_Armenian._) (_Hurons._)
Garocqua, Sun.
(_Iroquois, N. A._)
9. Ee.ph.c’h,(171) Epee, Fire.
to breathe, to pant. (_Katabans, N. A._)
10. Ph.ou.c’h, to Pioc Peez, Fire.
blow upon, kindle, (_Moxians, S. A._)
inflame. (_Heb._) Paahteh, Fire.
(_Nadowessians, N.
A._) Futui, Fire.
(_Betoans, S. A._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Bazu. Ibida.
9. Bazou, Fire.
10. Fosseye, the Sun.
11.
12.
13.
14. Aifi-am, Of-endi,
the Moon.
15. T’aib, Fire.
16.
17. Teb re, Heaven. Tubhia, Tubia, Fire.
18. Tuah hey, “the
Sun.”
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Phōs, Fire, Flame.
2. Ee.ph.c’h. (As Ee.ph-aistos,
above.) Vulcan, the God of
Fire. (_Greek._)
3 Ph.ou.c’h. (As Foc-us. (_Latin._)
above.)
4. Aifi, Fire. Fire, Fei-er,
(_Sumbava._) (_English &
German_,) formed
from the root by
adding -_er_, the
formative of nouns.
5. Fi. (_Japan._)
6. Fei. (_Siam._)
7. Vu-r.
(_Affghan._)
8. Bi. (_Siberian._)
9. B.sh.l, to ripen Bask. (_English._)
in the Sun, to boil.
(_Heb._)
10. Phos, Star. Phō-s, Fire, Light.
(_Japan._) (_Greek._)
11. Ee p h o, to Pha-o, to shine.
shine forth. (_Greek._)
(_Heb._)
12. Ee p.h.o, Phoi b-os, “Phœbus,”
Brightness, the Sun. (_Greek._)
Splendour.
(_Chald._)
13. Ee p.ph.e, very
beautiful. (_Heb._)
14. Alf, the Moon.
(_Kurdish._)
15. Af, the Sun, and
T’eb, the Sun.
(_Sanscr._)
16. Af-teb, the Sun.
(_Persian._)
17. Tab, Heat. Tep-or. (_Latin._) Tash, a Day.
(_Persian._) (_Pimans_, south of
_N. A._)
18. Taw, “Sun.” Tea-s, or Deas, Tasi, Fire. (_The
(_Kurdish._) Sunbeams. (_Welsh._) Kinai_, extreme N.
W. of _N. A._)
Daazoa, Sun.
(_Mokobis, S. A._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Tedi, “Moon.”
2.
3. To trig, “Moon.”
4. Ot u, and
5. Hauy, Fire. Hu, Fire.
(_Nubia & Abyss._)
6. Ei T.ei, and T’jih
“Fire.”
7. Tuah’ hey, “Sun.”
(_Nubia & Abyss._)
8. Haou. Uwya, Awia.
9. Eoohu, Day. Ua, and Ou, “Sun.”
(_Egypt._)
10. Aou.eh, Moon.
11. “I.oh” Lunus,
the God of the Moon.
(_Egypt._)
12. Joh Ooh Oih Oou,
Glory. (_Egypt._)
13. Hu.n, Sun. [See Hu,
Fire, above.]
14. Au-n, and Uwi-n,
“Sun.” [See Awia,
and Ua, Sun, above.]
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Tadi, “Hot.” Tata, Fire.
(_Affghan._) (_Omaguans_, N. A.)
2. Tab-dar, Hot. Tē k-ō, to melt, To-atka, Fire.
(_Persian._) consume. (_Greek._) (_Musgohges_, _S.
Carolina, N. A._)
3. Tœda, a Torch.
(_Latin._)
4. Ot m, to be burnt Hot. (_English._) Ouato, Fire.
up. (_Heb._) (_Caribs, S. A._)
5. Ho, “Fire.” Otschichta, Fire.
(_Chinese._) (_Onandagos, N. A._)
Oua, (_Natchez_,)
and You, Fire.
(_Woccons, N. A._)
6.
7. Ha, Hai, Hen, Hueiou, Weyo, Veio,
Sun. (_Corea._) “Sun.” (_Caraibs, S.
A._)
8. Ē-ōs, the Dawn.
(_Greek._)
9. Auhe, Oweeh, Moon.
(_Choctans, N. A._)
10. Yehiha, Moon.
(_Mobimans, S. A._)
11. Yachquau, Moon.
(_Senekas, N. A._)
12.
13. Hen, Sun (as Hu an, Phœbus, the
above). (_Corea._) Sun. (_Welsh._)
14.
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Tôn-ih, Fire.
2. Tô in Sun.
(_Nubia &
Abyssinia._)
3. Tan gu, Tan go, Tan
goa, Sun.
4. Danghitsi, Heaven.
5. Deemwa, Fire.
Diambo, Sun.
6. Ik, Ika, Fire. Ejia, Fire. Ecy, Fire.
(_Berbers &
Dongolans._)
7. Ag ning, Engink,
Sun.
8. Nahangue, Nonge, Eanga, Inyanga,
Sun. (_Fulahs & Inganga, Moon.
Phellatahs._)
9. K o e, to burn.
10. K o.h th, Fire.
11. K o e, to burn.
(_Egypt._)
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Ta-an, Fire. Ta-ande, and Teinde.
(_Welsh._) Teine, (_Algonquyn
“Fire,” also “The Dialects._)
Sun.” (_Irish._)
2. To-natiuh, Sun.
(_Mexican._)
3. Tschingochok, Tschingukuk, Sun.
Sun, and T angeik. (_Kadjaks_, N. W. of
(_Tschugassians_, N. _A._)
E. of _Asia_ and N.
W. of _America_.)
4. Ten gri, Heaven. Toendi, Heaven.
(_Tagurian._) (_Hurons, N. A._)
5. Tee me, or Tîme,
(_Irish_,) and Don y
m, or Tou y m, Heat,
Hot. (_Welsh._)
6. Ioak, Fire.
(_Choktahs, N. A._)
7. Ag nih, Fire. Iigain, “I Burn.” Ig nach, Ing nek,
(_Sanscrit._) (_Russ._) Ignis, Fire. (_Greenland._)
Ignem. (_Latin._)
Okon, Fire.
(_Sclavonian._)
8. Ee.c.b, And Cou Kaiō, to burn.
e, to burn. (_Greek._)
(_Hebrew._)
9. Co o h, Fire.
(_Sussees, N. A._)
10. K uthal, K tal,
Fire. (_Araucan, S.
A._)
11. Chuk kut.
(_Naragansetts._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. K o h th, Fire.
2. Shah, Flame. Shah
shah Heat.
(_Egyptian._)
3. Ejia, “Fire.” Ecy, Fire.
4. Edja, “Fire.”
5. Dio, “Fire.” Day,
“Sun.”
6.
7. Eju, Ejwyge, Sun.
8. Gajewoade, Fire.
9. Uk, Igodu, Moon.
10. K a, and K cha,
Moon.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Kohteoue, Kotawa,
(and used by the
same tribe.)
2. S cute, Fire.
(_Miamis, N. A._)
3.
4. Djo, Djau, Die-s, Day.
Heaven, Air. (_Latin._)
(_Sanscrit._)
5. Divasi, Day. Dio, Dios, (Jupiter,
Father of Day.
(_Greek._) |
6. Diwaspiti Diespater.
(“Diespater”), (_Latin._)
Jupiter, “Father of
Day.” (_Sanscrit._)
7. Equia, and Kizho, Kes-us,
Igus-guia, Sun. Kissessua, Gischi,
Goiza, Morning. Geschu, Sun;
(_Basque._) Kijigah, Day.
(_Algonquyn
dialects:_)
8.
9. Hak,(172) Moon;
Io-hakta, a Star.
(_Algonquyn_
dialects, N. A.)
10. K’akh, Fire.
(_Yucatan._) Kacha,
Moon.
(_Ugaljachnuti_,
near _Behring’s
Straits, N. A._)
Cayacu, Moon.
(_Brazil._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Onatejá, Moon. T’ jo, Moon. T’ ga, Moon.
(_Berber &
Dongolan._)
2. T.jih, Fire.
3.
4.
5. Onatejá, Moon. T’jo, “Moon.” T’ ga, Moon.
(_Berber &
Dongolan._)
6. Teelee, “Sun.”
Duléh, “Sun.”
7. Dalkah, “Day.”
8. Dilko, “Heaven.”
Dalkah, a Day, (as
above.)
9. Genaa, “Sun.”
10. Guiante, “Sun.”
11. Gonde, Gonda,
“Moon.”
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Tacock, Moon.
(_Esquimaux._)
2. Taiki, Fire.
(_Pimans, S.A._)
3. Tüiküt, Sun. Taiki, Sun.
(_Coriac._) (_Tarahumaran._)
4. D’ge, “Day.” Tag, “Day,”
(_Georgian._) (_German._) Day.
(_English._)
5. Tagara, “Heaven.”
(_Jakutian._)
6. Tael, Tylys, Taglich. (_German._)
Moon. (_Permian._) Dai-ly. (_English._)
7. Tjel, “Day.” Tsele, Day.
Tsjel-emi, “Daily.” (_Tarahumaran_, S.
(_Ostiaks._) of _N. A._)
8. Talkon, a Day. (_The
Kinai_, extreme N.
W. of _N. A._)
9. Guin esch, Gunes, Gunnei, or Cunnei, Coun, Fire.
“Sun.” (_Turk._) “A great Fire.” (_Chippeway._)
Kes-is Kesus, “Sun.”
(_Algonquyn._)
10. Gun, “Day.” Gunnes, “Warm.”
(_Casanians._) (_Welsh._)
11. Kun, Sun.
(_Tartar._)
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1.
2. Agonne, Moon.
3.
Asia. Europe. America.
1. Kjun, Day. Egun, Day. Kize-kun,
(_Turk._) (_Basque._) Okené-gat,(173)
“Day.” (_Algonquyn
dialects._)
2. Tes-Gessu, Sun.
[Evidently a
compound of Gischu
or Kiz-ho, the Sun,
with “Tesh.”(174)]
3. Tschi, Schi, Teshe-kow, “Day,”
“Day.” (_Morduins_, (_Algonquyn
N.E. of _Asia_.) Dialects._)
According to Du Ponceau the words for “Heaven” in the Algonquyn tongue are
derived from several sources. A numerous class consists of “Mots derivées
de _Kesuch_, Astre, Soleil,” i.e. words from _Kesuch_, “Sun, Star.”
Compare the names for the “Eye,” previously noticed; also traced by Du
Ponceau to Kesuch, or Kesus, “The Sun.”
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1.
2. T’ gachu, “Heaven.”
3.
4. Tschukko, “Heaven.”
K’ tak.
5. Nghoi, “Heaven.”
[Also “Thunder in
the Air.”]
6.
7. Homma, “Heaven.”
[See Omma, Moomo,
and other analogous
words previously
explained, applied
to “Sun and Moon.”]
Asia. Europe. America.
1. K jok,(175) Kez-hik, Keg-ik,
“Heaven.” (_Turk._) Heaven
2. Chok, “Heaven.”
(_Tart._) Kuk,
“Heaven.” (_Casan._)
3. Kh’igan, Gezhegon, Heaven.
“Heaven.” (_Comac._) (_Algonquyn._)
Ko’chan, “Heaven.”
(_Kamschatka._)
Kundschu, “Heaven.”
(_Jukadshires._)
4. Shkai, “Heaven.” “Sky.” (_Eng & Ta k, Tack,
(_Morduins._) Dan._) “Heaven.”
(_Esquimaux._)
Keschékewé, Heaven.
(_Algonquyn._)
5.
6. Kiusiu-luste.
(_Tscheremessian._)
7.
Another class of names for “heaven,” are words signifying “_On High_,” _En
Haut._
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Szemmèÿ, Heaven.
(_Nubia &
Abyssinia._)
2. Szèmma, Heaven.
(_Berbers &
Dongolans._)
3. Szemma, Heaven,
(_Phellata._)
4. Szemma.
5. Szemma.
6. Assaman. Sambiam
pungo. Assamane,
Heaven.
7.
8. Apĕ, Apē, Aphe,
“Head.”
9. A ph . o ph, a Ivaq.
Giant. (_Egypt._)
10. I banju
Asia. Europe. America.
1.
2.
3.
4. Sema, Heaven.
(_Arabic._)
5. Shmia, Heaven.
(_Pehlwi._)
6. Asman, Heaven. A woso-gamé, Heaven.
(_Siberian Tartars_) [Literally “En
Haut,” on high.]
(_Algonquyn._)
7. Upo. (_Greek._) Up. Apez, Heaven.
(_English._) (_Moxian._)
Heavion, to rise,
Heafon, Heaven.
(_Ang. Sax._) Haupt.
(_German._)
8. Heafod, (_Ang.
Sax._) Huf-wud,
Head. (_Swedish._)
9. I bag, I bâca.
(_Brazil._)
10. Oubecou,
(_Caraibs_,) Ipigem,
Heaven.
(_Abipones._)
Another Class of names for “Heaven,” are words signifying “_On High_,” _En
Haut._
NORTH MIDDLE SOUTH
AFRICA—_Egyptians, AFRICA—_Negroes._ AFRICA—_Hottentots,
&c._ &c._
1. Pe, and Phe,
Heaven.
2. N e th-Pe and
Ne-Pheou, Heaven-s
or Heaven.
3. Net-phe, an
Egyptian Goddess,
the consort of Seb
or Saturn. Her
emblem was “_The
Firmament_.”
4. Ne-Pheou,
Heaven-s or Heaven.
[Like the Greek
“Ouranoi.”]
(_Egypt._)
5. Sulu, “Heaven.” I suhlu, Heaven.
[Compare preceding
words.]
Asia. Europe. America.
1.
2. Ibo, Ibunga, the
Sun. (_California._)
3. Nebo, Heaven.
(_Sclavon._) Nev,
Heaven. (_Welsh._)
4.
5. S l, to raise, Celsus, Cœlum.
elevate. (_Hebrew._) (_Latin._)
Another Class of words for the “Sky” is derived, as is obvious in many
languages, from words primarily meaning “Air.”