&c.

&c.

to abstract and generalize, all their ideas are borrowed Chaldean from such objects as most forcibly strike their senses. Language, This circumstance would naturally suggest to savages the idea of conveying their sentiments to each other, when absent, by delineations of corporeal objects. Thus, if a savage asked a loan of his friend's horse, he might find means to have conveyed to him the figure of that animal; and so of others. This was the very lowest species of ideal communication, and has been styled picture-writing.

Chaldean to reject. Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, PtoleLanguage, my, and most other ancient geographers and historians, are universally agreed, that Egypt, at least that part of it called Delta, was overflown by the sea, and consequently uninhabitable for many centuries after the dispersion of mankind. When we consider the low situation of the Delta, and the violent current of the tide from the coast of Phoenicia and Palestine towards that shore, we would be almost tempted to adopt this hypothesis; but the sacred records avouch the contrary. According to them, we find Egypt a populous, rich, and flourishing kingdom, as early as the age of Abraham. Had the Lower Egypt been a pool of stagnating water at any time after the general deluge, we think it could not have been drained, cleared, cultivated, and stocked with inhabitants, so early as the days of Abraham. Diodorus Siculus, however, is positive that the EgypLib. xiii. tians were a colony of Ethiopians; and this he endeapassim. vours to prove by the similarity of features, customs, laws, religious ceremonies, &c. between the two nations. That there was a constant intercourse of good offices between these two branches of the Hamites, cannot be questioned; and that they nearly resembled each other in many respects, is too evident to admit of contradiction. The excavations, originally dug out of the solid rocks of porphyry and marble, in which the natives resided before the plains were drained, have been observed by a most judicious traveller (G) a very few years ago. At the same time, the most accurate and judicious travellers (H) who have visited that region in modern times, are generally of opinion that the land has gained nothing on the sea since the period when Herodotus wrote his description of that country; from which circumstances we may be led to conclude, that the idea of the inundation of the Delta is not founded in fact.

68 Egyptian hieroglyphics.

But even admitting that the Egyptian Delta has acquired nothing from the sea since the age of Herodotus to the present, it certainly does not follow that the region in question was never overflown by that element; since there are in many parts of the globe, large tracts of land, certainly once covered with sea, which have continued to this day in the very same situation in which they were 2000 years ago. We leave the decision of this point to the judgment of our readers.

We have already hinted our opinion of the nature of the Egyptian language; but because Egypt is generally thought to have been the native land of hieroglyphics, and because many are of opinion that hieroglyphical characters were prior to alphabetical, we shall hazard a few conjectures with respect to that species of writing.

The end of speech, in general, is to enable men to communicate their thoughts and conceptions one to another when present; the use of writing is to perform the same office when people are at so great a distance that vocal sounds cannot mutually reach them. Hieroglyphics are said to have been invented to supply this defect. The most ancient languages were everywhere full of tropes and figures borrowed from sensible objects. As in that stage of society men have not learned

Necessity would soon impel our savage correspondents to fabricate a method more extensively useful, which would likewise be suggested by the constant use of the metaphorical mode of speech. Some savage leader, more sagacious than the vulgar herd, would observe that certain sensible objects were fitted, according to the rules of analogy, to represent certain human passions, and even some abstract ideas; and this would be readily enough adopted by the herd as a new improvement. In this case a horn might be the emblem of power, a sword of bravery, a lion of fury, a fox of cunning, a serpent of malice, &c. By and by artificial signs might be contrived to express such ideas as could not readily be denoted by bodily objects. This might be called symbolical writing. Such was the foundation of the Chinese characters; and hence that prodigious number of letters of which the written language of that people is composed. Farther they could not proceed, notwithstanding their boasted inventive powers; and farther, we believe, no nation ever did proceed, who had once upon a time no other characters but hieroglyphical. The Mexicans had arrived at the very lowest stage of hieroglyphical writing, but had not taken one step towards alphabetical. The Hurons employ hieroglyphical symbols, but never entertained a single idea of alphabetical. Hieroglyphical characters are the images of objects conveyed to the mind by the organs of vision; alphabetic are arbitrary artificial marks of sound, accommodated by compact to convey to the mind the ideas of objects by the organs of hearing. In a word, we think that there is not the least analogy between these two species to conduct from the one to the other: we are therefore of opinion, that hieroglyphical characters were never the vulgar channels of ideal conveyance among civilized people.

We know that in this point we differ from many learned, judicious, and ingenious writers; some of whom have taken much pains to investigate the intermediate stages through which the fabricators of characters must have passed in their progress from hieroglyphical to alphabetical writing. These writers have adopted a plan analogous to Bishop Wilkins's project of an artificial language. In this theory, we own, we are led to suspect that they supposed all mankind were once upon a time savages, and were left to hammer out words, as well as characters, by necessity, ingenuity, experience, practice, &c. For our part, we have endeavoured to prove, in our section on the Hebrew language, that alphabetical writing was an antediluvian invention; and we now lay it down as our opinion, that among all those nations which settled near the centre of civiliza

tion,

69 Were never in vulgar

use;

Chaldean tion, hieroglyphics were, comparatively, a modern faLanguage, brication. & c.

70

But em

conceal

tiated;

The Orientals are, at this day, extravagantly devoted to allegory and fiction. Plain unadorned truth has with them no charms. Hence that extravagant medley of fables and romance with which all antiquity is replete, and by which all ancient history is disguised and corrupted. Every doctrine of religion, every precept of morality, was tendered to mankind in parables and proverbs. Hence, says the Scripture, to under stand a proverb, the words of the wise, and their dark sayings. The eastern sages involved their maxims in this enigmatical dress for several reasons to fix the attention of their disciples; to assist their memory; to gratify their allegorical taste; to sharpen their wit and exercise their judgment; and sometimes perhaps to display their own acuteness, ingenuity, and inven

tion.

It was among the ancients an universal opinion, that the most sacred arcana of religion, morality, and the sublime sciences, were not to be communicated to the uninitiated rabble. For this reason every thing sacred was involved in allegorical darkness.

Here, then, we ought to look for the origin of hieroglyphical or picture writing among the civilized nations of the east, They did not employ that speployed to cies of writing because they were ignorant of alphabesacred doc.tical characters, but because they thought fit to contrines from ceal the most important heads of their doctrines under the unini- hieroglyphical figures. The Egyptian priests were most celebrated for their skill in devising those emblematical representations; but other nations likewise employed them. We learn from the fragments of Berosus the Chaldean historian, preserved by Syncellus and Alexander Polyhistor, that the walls of the temple of Belus at Babylon were covered all over with those emblematical paintings. These characters were called igo, because they were chiefly employed to represent sacred objects; and yλvqıza, because they were originally carved or engraved. Their name points to their original use. Instead of pursuing these observations, which the nature of our design will not permit, we must refer our readers to Herodotus, lib. ii. Diodorus Sic. lib. i. Strabo, lib. xvii. Plut. Isis et Osiris; and among the Christian fathers to Clem. Alex. Euseb. Præp. Evang.; but chiefly to Horapollo's Hieroglyphica.

From this deduction we would conclude, that this species of writing was an adventitious mode in Egypt, peculiar to the priests, and employed chiefly to exhibit things sacred; and that among all civilized people it did not supersede the use of alphabetical characters, nor did the use of the latter originate from the former. and poste- When alphabetical letters were invented, if indeed they were a human invention, they were antecedent to the phabetical other in use and extent. The Egyptian priests alone characters. knew the true import of those sacred symbols; and com

71

rior in

time to al

municated that knowledge first to their own children from generation to generation, then to the initiated, and last of all to the grandees of the nation, all of whom were indeed initiated. The hieroglyphics of Egypt were not then the symbols of any sacred occult language; but signs invented by the priests, and prophets or wise men, in order to represent their deities, the at3.

&c.

tributes and perfections of their deities, and the myste- Chaldean rious arcana of their religion, and many other circum- Language, stances relating to objects of importance, which were deemed either too sacred or too important to be imparted to the vulgar.

The Egyptians ascribed the invention of letters to a person whom they called Thoth*, Theuth, or Thyoth; Euseb. the Greeks 'Eguns; and the Romans Mercurius. Plato++ Phædrus. Prop. Ev. calls him a god, or a godlike man; Diodorus ‡ makes‡ Lib. i. him privy counsellor to Osiris ; Sanchoniathon ap. Euseb. connects him with the Phoenician Cronus or & Prep. Ev. Saturn. To this Mercury the Egyptians ascribe the invention of all the arts and sciences. He was probably some very eminent inventive genius, who flourished during the first ages of the Egyptian monarchy, and who perhaps taught the rude savages the art of writing.

72

racters in

lib. v.

According to Diodorus Siculus, the Egyptians had Two kinds two kinds of letters; the one sacred, the other com- of alphabemon the former the priests taught their own children, tical chathe latter all learned promiscuously. In the sacred cha- Egypt. racters the rites and ceremonies of their religion were * Lib. i. couched; the other was accommodated to the ordinary business of life. Clem. Alexand. mentions three different styles of writing employed by the Egyptians +.+ Strom. "The pupils, who were instructed by the Egyptians, first learned the order and arrangement of the Egyptian letters, which is called epistolography, that is, the manner of writing letters; next, the sacred character, which the sacred scribes employed; lastly, the hieroglyphic character, one part of which is expressed by the first elements, and is called Cyriologic, that is, cupital, and the other symbolic. Of the symbolic kind, one part explains properly by imitation; and the other is written tropically, that is, in tropes and figures; and a third by certain enigmatical expressions. Accordingly, when we intend to write the word sun, we describe a circle; and when the moon, the figure of that planet appearing horned, conformable to the appearance of that luminary after the change." In this passage we have an excellent description of the three different modes of writing used by the Egyptians; the common, the sacred, and the hieroglyphic. The last he describes according to its three divisions, in exact conformity to our preceding observations.

73

By the description above translated, it plainly ap- The sacred pears, that the sacred character of the Egyptians was letters and entirely different from the hieroglyphic; and by this language of Egypt consideration we are in a good measure justified, in Chaldaic. supposing, as we have done all along, that the sacred letters of the Egyptians were actuaily the Chaldaic. The inscriptions on the obelisks mentioned by Cassiodorus, so often quoted, were certainly engraved in the sacred character; and the character in which they were drawn was that above mentioned. If the sacred letters were Chaldaic, the sacred language was probably the same.

The Egyptians pretended, that the Babylonians derived the knowledge of the arts and sciences from them; while, on the other hand, the Babylonians maintained, that the former had been tutored by them. The fact is, they both spoke the same language; used the same religious rites; had applied with equal success to astrology, astronomy, geometry, arithmetic, and the other

sciences;

74 The Eyptian and Phoenician Jangu ges

the same.

75 The vulgar letters of Egypt nearly the same with

the Hebrew or Phoenician.

The most faithful specimen of the vulgar language of the Egyptians, is, we believe, still preserved in the Coptic, which, however, is so replete with Grecisms, that it must be difficult to trace it out.

Under the Ptolemies, the Greek was the language of the court, and consequently must have diffused itself over all the country. Hence, we believe, twothirds of the Coptic are Greek words, diversified by their terminations, declensions, and conjugations only. To be convinced of the truth of this, our learned and curious readers need only consult Christian Scholtz's Egyptian and Coptic grammar and dictionary, corrected and published by Godfred Woide, Oxford, 1788.

The Egyptians and Phoenicians were in a manner cousin-germans, and consequently must have spoken the same language; that is, one of the sister dialects of the Hebrew, Chaldean, Arabian, Cushite, &c.This is not a mere conjecture; it may be realized by almost numberless examples. It is true, that when Joseph's brethren went down to Egypt, and that ruler deigned to converse with them, they could not un derstand the Egyptian idiom which he spoke; nor would he, had he been actually an Egyptian, have understood them without an interpreter. The only conclusion from this circumstance is, that by this time the Egyptian had deviated considerably from the original language of mankind. The Irish and Welch, every body knows, are only different dialects of the Celtic tongue; and yet experience proves, that a native of Ireland and another of Wales cannot well comprehend each other's language, nor converse intelligibly without an interpreter. The Erse, spoken in the Highlands of Scotland, and the Irish, are known to be both branches of the old Celtic; yet a Scotch Highlander and an Irishman can hardly understand each other's speech. By a parity of reason, a Hebrew and an Egyptian might, in the age of Joseph, speak only different dialects of the same original tongue, and yet find it difficult to understand one another. The fact seems to be, the Hebrew dialect had been in a manner stationary, from the migration of Abraham to that period; whereas the Egyptian, being spoken by a powerful, civilized, and highly cultivated people, must have received many improvements, perhaps additions, in the course of near two centuries.

The descendants of Canaan and of Mizraim were strictly connected in their religious ceremonies: they worshipped the same objects, namely, the Host of Heaven; they mourned Osiris and Adonis in concert; they carried on a joint commerce, and, we think, spoke the same language: we may, therefore conclude, that their vulgar letters were nearly the same, both in form, disposition, and number. Their original number was probably 16, viz. five vowels, six mutes, simple and middle, four liquids, and the solitary .-With these, it is like-With these, it is likely, was joined a mark of aspiration, or an h, such as we have in the Roman alphabet, and find on some Greek monuments. Cadmus was originally an Egyptian; that leader brought a new set of letters into Greece. These are generally deemed to be Phoenician. They were nearly the same with the ancient Pelasgic, as will be

&c.

shown in the section of the Greek language. The latter, Chaldean we think, were from Egypt, and consequently the for- Language, mer must have been from the same quarter. Danaus, Perseus, Lelex, &c. were of Egyptian extraction: they too adopted the Cadmean characters, without substituting any of their own.

The Jonim or Ionians, emigrated from Gaza, a colony of Egyptians; and their letters are known to have differed very little from those of Cadmus and the Pelasgi. The conclusion, therefore is, that the vulgar Egyptian letters were the same with the Phoenician.

We are abundantly sensible that there are found upon Egyptian monuments characters altogether different from those we have been describing. At what time, by what people, and to what language, these letters belonged, we will not pretend to determine. The Ethiopians, the Chaldeans, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Saracens, have, at different times, been sovereigns of that unhappy country. Perhaps other nations, whose memory is now buried in oblivion, may have erected monuments, and covered them with inscriptions composed of words taken from different languages, perhaps, upon some occasions, whimsically devised, with a view to perplex the curious antiquaries of future ages. Some of these are composed of hieroglyphics intermingled with alphabetical characters, artificially deranged, in order to render them unintelligible. These we do not pretend to develope; because the most inquisitive and sagacious antiquaries are not yet agreed as to their purport and signification.

76

names of

We shall now go on to show, that most part of the Egyptian names of persons and places, &c. which have been Hebrew conveyed down to us, may, in general, be reduced to original. a Hebrew, Phoenician, Syrian, or Chaldean original. As the first of these languages is most generally known, we shall employ it as our arch-type or standard, beginning with those terms which occur in Scrip

ture.

66

The word Pharaoh, the title of the melech or king of Egypt, is, we think, compounded of two terms, which plainly discover a Hebrew original. According to an oriental tradition, the first who assumed this title was the sovereign of the royal shepherds; a race of people. from Arabia and Phoenicia. They conquered Egypt at an early period, and kept possession of it for several centuries. They gloried in the title ixon, or izvo01, which according to Josephus contra Apion, signifies royal shepherds." The word Pharaoh seems to be compounded of TM Phar, “a bullock,,' and ny, Rachah, "to feed ;" hence пy, Pharachah, as we think it ought to be written. The name given to Joseph is evidently of kin with the Hebrew; for zaphnath differs very little from the Hebrew verb txaphan, which signifies "to hide, to keep secret ;" Pancah or Phaneah, signifies much the same with the Hebrew Phanah, aspexit: so that the name actually intimates one who sees hidden things; which was certainly the very idea the prince intended to convey by giving him that name.

Potiphar, or Potipherah, the name of Joseph's fatherin-law, has likewise a dialectical affinity with the Hebrew idiom. In that language Patah signifies" to open, to explain," which was one part of the sacerdotal office; and Phar imports "a bullock." Potipbar was

& c

&c.

and the Hebrew oin, "a fountain;" so that the word Chaldean imports the king of fountains. The Hebrews always de- Language, nominated the land of Egypt the land of Mizraim; the Egyptians themselves, in later times, seemed to have called it Ayväтos, Ægyptus, "Egypt," which some think is compounded of Ai, Hebrew," an island, a country, a province," and Copt or Cupt, "a famous city in that country."

Chaldean then priest of the bullock, that is, the ox, apis, sacred Language, to the sun (1). This person was priest or prince of On, which, according to Cyrillus on Hosea, was an Egyptian name of that luminary. The Hebrew word hon or chon signifies" power, wealth, sufficiency;" a very proper epithet for the sun, who was thought to bestow those blessings. The name of Joseph's wife was Asenath or Asnath, compounded of Ishah," a woman," and Naith or Neit, an Egyptian name of Minerva, a votary of

Minerva."

66

Almost all the names of cities belonging to Egypt which are mentioned in Scripture are evidently Hebrew. To be satisfied as to this position, our curious readers may consult Jamieson's Spicilegia, an excellent book very little known. The names of most of the Egyptian deities are significant in the Hebrew tongue; and in that dialect the names appear to have been imposed with great judgment and propriety, plainly indicating some office assigned them, or pointing to some peculiar attribute. We shall produce a few instances.

The

Osiris was the great divinity of Egypt; he was certainly the sun. The Egyptians gave their deities a variety of names in allusion to their various offices and attributes. Jablonski has in a manner wearied himself with tracing the signification of this name. In Hebrew we have Oshir," to grow rich, to be enriched." sun may be called the great enricher of nature, and therefore might properly be called by a name alluding to that quality. Isis was both the moon and the earth. Ishah is the Hebrew word for woman, and Horapollo assigns this very derivation. Anubis was one of the names of Mercury among the Egyptians: He was always figured with the head of a dog. He accompanied Isis in her peregrinations in quest of Osiris, and frighted away the wild beasts from attacking the princess. In Hebrew, Nubah signifies" to bark." Here the analogy, we think, is evident. Many Egyptian names begin with Can, such as Canobus, Canopus, &c. The Hebrew word Cahen or Cohen, Syr. Con or Chon, intimates both a prince and a priest. Ob or Aub, in Hébrew, imports" a bottle, a flaggon," any thing round and prominent like the human belly. In the language of Egypt it was often applied to the sun, in allusion to his rotundity. In the temple of Jupiter Ammon or Amon, in the desert of Libya, there was a statue of the god representing the navel of the human body, which was probably framed in allusion to this fancy. Hence the Pythoness, or people who, according to the Scripture, had familiar spirits, were said to prophecy by the inspiration of Ob, as the Delphic priestess did by that of Apollo. Again, many Egyptian names end with siris, as Calasiris, Termosiris. This termination is no doubt a cognate of the Hebrew and Chaldean sar or zar, signifying a prince, or grandee, &c." The river Nile in the Ethiopic dialect is called Siris; that is, we believe, the king of rivers. The same flood seems to derive the name by which it is generally known, from the Hebrew nehel, a valley, or torrent running down a valley." The same river was often called Oceanus, a word composed of og, or oc, or och, which signifies "a king, a leader,” a king, a leader,"

From this specimen, we hope it will appear that the Egyptian language in the more early ages was one of those dialects into which that of the descendants of the postdiluvian patriarchs was divided, and perhaps subdivided, a few centuries after the deluge. Among all those, we believe, such an affinity will be found, as plainly demonstrates that they originally sprung from one common stock. Here we might easily follow the Egyptian language into Greece; and there we are persuaded we might trace a vast number of Egyptian terms into that tongue, which, however, the nature of this inquiry will not permit. If our learned readers should incline to know more of the affinity of the Egyptian tongue with the others so often mentioned, they may consult Bochart's Chanaan, Walton's Proleg. Gebelin's Monde Prim. Jamieson's Spicilegia, &c.

SECT. IV. Of the Persian Language.

THE Persian language is divided into the ancient and modern; the former of which is at this day very imperfectly known, the latter is at present one of the most expressive, and at the same time one of the most highly polished, in the world. We shall, in treating of this language, in compliance with the plan we have all along followed, begin with the ancient.

78

Moham

When Mohammed was born, and ANU'SHI'RAVA'N, At the whom he calls the just king, sat on the throne of Persia, birth of two languages were generally prevalent in that em- med two pire (K). The one was called Deri, and was the dia- languages lect of the court, being only a refined and elegant branch prevalent of the Parsi, so called from the province of which Shi-in Persia. raz is now the capital; and that of the learned, in which most books were composed, and which had the name of Pahlavi, either from the heroes who spoke it in former times, or from pahlu, a tract of land which included some considerable cities of Iran: The ruder dialects of both were spoken by the rustics of several provinces; and many of these distinct idioms were vernacular, as happens in every kingdom of considerable extent. Besides the Parsi and Pahlavi, a very ancient And a and abstruse tongue was known to the priests and philo- more ansophers, called the language of the Zend, because a book cient language than on religious and moral duties which they held sacred, either and which bore that name, had been written in it; known only while the Pazend or comment on that work was com- to the posed in Pahlavi, as a more popular dialect. The let-priests. ters of this book were called zend, and the language avesta.

The Zend and the old Pahlavi are now almost extinct in Iran, and very few even of the Guebres can read it ; while the Parsi remaining almost pure in Shabnameh,

has

79

Persian has, by the intermixture of Arabic words, and many Language. imperceptible changes, now become a new language, exquisitely polished by a series of fine writers both in prose and verse, analogous to the different idioms gradually formed in Europe after the subversion of the Roman empire.

Parsi lan

The very learned and laborious Sir William Jones is guage, and confident that the Parsi abounds with words from the Sanscrit, with no other change than such as may be observed in the numerous dialects of India: that very many Persian imperatives are the roots of Sanscrit verbs; and that even the moods and tenses of the Persian verb substantive, which is the model of all the rest, are deducible from the Sanscrit by an easy and clear analogy. From this he infers that the Parsi, like the various idiom dialects, is derived from the language of the Bramins. This conclusion, we imagine, is not altogether just, since by the same train of reasoning we may infer that the Sanscrit is derived from the Parsi.

81

the Pahlavi,

The same learned gentleman adds, that the multitude of compounds in the Persian language proves that it is not of Arabic but Indian original. This is undoubtedly true; but though the Parsi is not of Arabic original, it does not necessarily follow that it is of Sanscrit. We might with the same propriety, and with an equal show of reason, conclude, that the Greek language is descended of the Sanscrit, because it too abounds with compounds. We may then rest assured, that neither the one nor the other argument adduced by the ingenious president proves that the Parsi tongue is a descendant of the Sanscrit.

The gentleman so often mentioned, assures us, that the Zend bears a strong resemblance to the Sanscrit ; which, however, it might do without being actually derived from it, since we believe every oriental scholar will find that all the languages from the Mediterranean to the utmost coast of Hindostan exhibit very strong signatures of a common original. The Parsi, however, not being the original dialect of Iran or Persia, we shall pursue it no farther at present, but return to give some account of the Pahlavi, which was probably the primitive language of the country. We have observed above, that the Pazend or comment on the Zend was composed in the Pahlavi for the use of the vulgar. This, according to Sir William, was a dialect of the Chaldaic; and of this assertion he exhibits the following proof.

By the nature of the Chaldean tongue, most words ended in the first long vowel, like shemaiá, "heaven;" and that very word, unaltered in a single letter, we find in the Pazend, together with lailiá, "night," meyá, "water,” nírá, “fire," matrá,“ rain," and a multitude of others, all Arabic or Hebrew, with a Chaldean termination; so zamar, by a beautiful metaphor from pruning trees, means in Hebrew to compose verses, and thence, by an casy transition, to sing them; now in Pahlavi we see the verb zamarûniten, "to sing," with its forms zamaraunemi," I sing," and zamzunid, "he sang;" the verbal terminations of the Persian being added to the Chaldaic root. All these words are integral parts of the language; not adventitious like the Arabic nouns and verbals engrafted on the modern Persian.

From this reasoning it plainly appears, 18t, That Pallavi was the ancient language of Persia ; and, 2d, That

the ancient Persian was a cognate dialect of the Chal- Persian dean, Hebrew, Arabic, Phoenician, &c. M. Anquetil Language. has annexed to his translation of the Zendavesta two vocabularies in Zend and Pahlavi, which he found in an approved collection of Rawayat or Traditional Pieces in modern Persian. His vocabulary of the Pahlavi strongly confirms this opinion concerning the Chaldaic origin of that language. But with respect to the Zend, it abounded with vast numbers of pure Sanscrit words, to such a degree, that six or seven words in ten belonged to that language.

82

from Chal

From this deduction it would appear, that the oldest derived languages of Persia were Chaldaic and Sanscrit and daic and that when they had ceased to be vernacular, the Pahlavi Sanscrit, and Zend were deduced from them respectively, and &c. the Parsi either from the Zend, or immediately from the dialect of the Brahmans: but all had perhaps a mixture of Tartarian; for the best lexicographers assert, that numberless words in ancient Persian are taken from the Cimmerians. With respect to the last of these, we cannot help being of opinion, that colonies of people from the neighbourhood of Persia did transport themselves into Crim Tartary, and perhaps into Europe. These colonists brought along with them those vocables which still occur in their dialect. Emigrants from those quarters must have found their way into Scandinavia, since numberless Persian words are still current in those regions. Perhaps Odin and his followers emigrated from the neighbourhood of Media and Persia, and brought with them the dialect of the nations from whose country they had taken their departure.

same

83 With respect to the Zend, it might well be a dialect The Zend of the Sanscrit, and was probably a sacred language; from the and if so, concealed from the vulgar, and reserved for the offices of religion. If Zoroastres, or Zaratusht as source. the orientals call him, travelled into Egypt, and was initiated in the mysteries of the Egyptian religion, as some pretend he was, he might be instructed in the sacred dialect of that people by the priests under whom he studied. When that philosopher returned into Persia, and became the apostle of a new religion, he might compose the volume of his laws and religious institutions in the sacred language of his Egyptian tutors. This language then became that of the Magi, who concealed it carefully from the knowledge of the uninitiated, as the priests did in Egypt and the Brahmans in Hindostan.

In our Section on the Sanscrit language, we shall give a detail of a number of particulars, which to us seem to furnish a presumption that the language in question was imported from Egypt into Hindostan. We confess there are not sufficient data to improve these presumptions into absolute certainty; but we hope the time is at hand when the worthy members of the Asiatic Society will discover abundant materials to ascertain the truth of this position. We are the rather inclined to adopt this hypothesis, when we consider the character of Zoroastres in connection with that of the Egyptian Cohens and of the Indian Brahams.

If this opinion should one day appear to be wellfounded, we believe the coincidence between the language of the Zend and the Sanscrit will be easily ac counted for, without making the Hindoos masters of Iran or Persia, and then driving them back to the shores of the Ganges. That the nations of Turan or Scythia