When all allowances are made, however, the fact remains that the
Egyptian language as we know it was related to the Semitic family of
speech. It stood to the latter as an elder sister, or rather as the
sister of the parent-language which the existing Semitic dialects
presuppose. It was not like the so-called Hamitic dialects of Eastern
Africa, which are African languages Semitized, but it was itself
of the same stock as Hebrew or Semitic Babylonian. It represents,
however, a form of language at an earlier stage of development than
are any of those which we call Semitic, and it has, moreover, been
largely influenced and modified by foreign languages, which we may
term African. So extensive has this influence been that the Semitic
element has been even more disguised in it than the Teutonic element is
disguised in modern English. In leaving the soil of Asia the language
of Egypt took upon it an African dress.
Now though language can prove but little as regards race, it can
prove a great deal as regards history. A mixed language means a mixed
history, and indicates an intimate contact between the populations who
spoke the languages which are represented in it. Egyptian grammar would
not have been Semitic if those who imposed it upon the natives of the
Nile had not been of Semitic descent, or at all events had not come
from a region where the language was Semitic. Nor would this grammar
have been modified by foreign admixture if a part of those who learned
to use it had not previously been accustomed to some other form of
speech. And since we know of no Semitic languages in Africa which were
not brought from Asia, we are justified in concluding that the Semitic
element in the Egyptian language was of Asiatic origin.
But we can go yet a step further. Where two languages are brought
into close contact, the general rule is that that of the stronger
race prevails. The conqueror is less likely to learn the language
of the conquered than the conquered are to learn the language of
their masters. On the other hand, the negro slave in America became
English-speaking, whereas the English emigrant wherever he goes
preserves the language of his fathers. It is only where a conquering
caste brings no women with it that it is likely to lose its language.
When, therefore, we find that Old Egyptian is an Africanized Semitic
language, we have every right to infer that it is because invaders
brought it with them from Asia who were Semites either by race or by
language. In other words, Egypt must have been occupied in prehistoric
days by a people who came from the Semitic area in Asia.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account