By referring to the instances where we allege are to be found variations
of the names _Cain_ and _Naamah_, it will be at once noticed that some
of them are quite remarkable. Shall we be excused for a few remarks in
explanation, by way of example, of other lingual changes? Queen
Elizabeth lived but yesterday; and her history has not advanced through
a very great variety of languages, yet we find, in commemoration of her,
one place named Elizabeth, Elizabeth City, Elizabethtown,
Elizabethville, Elizabethburg, and another, even Betsey’s Wash-tub, and
because she was never married, one is called Virgin Queen, and another
Virginia.
Now, we all know that at a very ancient period, the worship of the sun
and of fire was introduced into the British Isles. Is there nothing left
at this day in commemoration of that fact? The sun became an object of
great and absorbing consideration. The ancient Celtic word _grian_ meant
the sun; from the application of this word and its variations, we have a
proof, not only of how words are made to change, but also of the fact
that the people of that country were once addicted to the worship of the
sun or fire. Hence Apollo, who was the sun personified, was called
Grynæus. At once we find a singular change in the name of the Druidical
idol _Crom-Cruach_, often called _Cean Groith_, the head of the sun.
This was the image or idol god to whom the ancient inhabitants of
Ireland offered infants and young children a sacrifice. It was in fact
the same as the Moloch of the ancient Hamitic occupants of Palestine,
and was so firmly established in the superstitions of the world, that
whatever race had the ascendency in Ireland, it continued to be thus
worshipped, giving the name of the “Plains of slaughter” to the place of
its location, until St. Patrick had the success to destroy the image and
its worship; and hence also the names _Knoc-greine_ and _Tuam-greine_,
hills where the sun was worshipped, and other places in Ireland, even
now keep in memory that worship: _Cairn-Grainey_, the sun’s heap,
Granniss’ bed, corrupted from _Grian-Beacht_, the sun’s circle. A point
of land near Wexford is called _Grenor_, the sun’s fire, and the town of
_Granaid_, because the sun was worshipped there. And we may notice a
still greater variation in _Carig-Croith_, the rock of the sun—and even
our present word _grange_, from the almost obsolete idea, a place
enclosed, separate and distinct, but open to the sun, now used as a
synonyme of _farm_.
Let us take our word _fire_, and we shall perceive remarkable changes
through all the languages from the Chaldaic down. _Gen._ xi. 28, “_Ur_”
is translated from אוּר which means fire. Abraham was a native of
Chaldea, and from a place where they worshipped fire, or the sun. It was
used to mean the sun, _Job_ xxxviii. 12; also, in the plural, _Isa._
xxiv. 15: “Wherefore glorify ye the Lord in the fires?” It is here ארֻים
_urim_. Because fire emitted light, it became used to mean light. The
words _urim_ and _thummim_ meant lights or fires, and truth: among the
fire-worshippers the same term meant _fire_ and _sun_. The Copts called
their kings _suns_. Hence from this term they took the word _ouro_, to
mean the idea of royalty; their article _pi_, made _piouro_, the sun or
the _king_, which being carried back to the Hebrews, they made it
_Pharaoh_; but the sun was regarded as a god, and hence the Egyptian
kings came to be called gods; but the Chaldaic and Hebrew אוּר, when
applied to fire or the sun by the Copts, as an object of worship, was
distinguished from the idea of royalty by the term _ra_ and _re_, with
the particle _pira_ and _pire_, generally written _phra_ and _phre_.
Hence the Greek πυρ, _pur_, to mean fire, and hence pyrites, which means
a fire-stone, a stone well burned, or a stone containing fire, &c.
And hence also the Hebrew word ראי _rai_, a mirror, vision, the god of
vision, and by figure a conspicuous or illustrious person. But according
to Butman, the Sanscrit root _Raja_ is the original of the obsolete
Greek word, Ῥα, Ῥαια, Ῥαων, and if so, possibly of the Chaldaic word
under view. But however that may be, it is evident that the Greek
_radios_ is at least derived through the channel indicated; and we now
use the term _ray_ to mean an emanation from great power. Our word
_regent_ is also from the same source, through the Latin _rex_, and may
be found, slightly modified, through all the European dialects. And it
may be remarked that, cognate therewith, we have the Arabic word
_raiheh_, or _raygeh_, to mean fragrancy; the poetic minds of the
Arabians uniformly applying this image to legitimate rule and
government.
And if we take a view of the filiations of languages, even as they are
now found, such changes cannot be deemed unusual, especially if we take
into consideration the inevitable variation words are found to undergo
in their progress through different countries and ages of time; and more
especially, if we notice the precise manner in which lingual variations
are found to operate.
Changes of language sometimes take place upon a single word apparently
by caprice, among different tribes of people,—sometimes by the
transposition of the consonant or vowel sound; by the insertion of a
letter or letters for the sake of euphony; by the contraction or
abbreviation of letters for the sake of despatch; by the reduplication
of a letter or syllable on the account of some real or fancied
importance or emphasis attached to it; and by the deletion or addition
of a letter or syllable at the commencement or end of a word, for a real
or supposed more felicitous enunciation of certain sounds in succession;
and hence alterations, slight at first, are liable to become quite
remarkable.
Thus μορφη in Greek, becomes _formæ_ in Latin; _regnum_ becomes _reign_;
_cœlum, ciel_; _ultra jectum, Utrecht_; and עבד _ebed, eved_, as
variously pronounced, meaning a _slave_, becomes _obediens_,
_obedienter_, _obedio_, _obedientia_, in Latin, and _obey_, _obedient_,
&c., in English. The Celtic _ros_ becomes _horse_, and the English
_grass_ becomes _garse_. Consonants of the same order are interchanged;
p becomes _b_, and b _v_, d _t_, g _k_ and sometimes _n_,—φ becomes _ph_
or _f_, d or t becomes _th_, and g or c _gh_. It is therefore impossible
that such changes should not have taken place, and therefore they give
proof of the genuineness of the history they may develop.
------------------