An abundance of popular literature has familiarised the public
with the outer aspect of ancient Egypt, but the world is still far
from recognising the message she sent to mankind. We must go back
to ‘the Wonderland on the banks of the mighty Nile’ for the origin
of all things which most interest us. It is the very cradle-land
of language. Her tongue contains all the elements of the so-called
‘Aryan,’[464] Semitic, and Allophyllian or Turanian families, and dates
long before the days of the present distribution. Bunsen’s ‘Egypt’
first noticed this fact at some length, without, however, dwelling
upon its importance. ‘All Semitic pronouns and suffixes,’ says M.
C. Bertin, ‘can be traced back to Egyptian, especially the Egyptian
of the earliest dynasties’; he might have added much about other
mechanical forms. Brugsch tells us (i. 3) that the primitive roots and
the essential elements of the Egyptian grammar point to an intimate
connection of the Indo-Germanic (!) and Semitic languages.[465] The
Allophyllian or Agglutinative Turanian,[466] a _tertium quid_ which is
neither ‘Aryan’ nor ‘Semitic,’ is also traceable in old Coptic.
[Heading: _ORIGINS IN EGYPT._]
What, then, do these facts suggest? Simply that the elements existing
in Egyptian travelled from the banks of the Nile and evolved,
discreted, and differentiated themselves in many centres. The
word-compounding or Iranian scheme found homes in Eastern Europe
(Greece, Italy, and the Slavonic or quasi-Asiatic half); in Asia
Minor—especially Phrygia—in Mesopotamia, in Persia, and finally in
India, where the settlement was comparatively modern. This explains
how a philologist would derive Sanskrit from Lithuania. This saves
us from the ‘Aryan heresy’;[467] this abolishes ‘Indo-European,’ and
worse still ‘Indo-Germanic’—that model specimen of national modesty.
Both are terms which contain a theory and an unproved theory. Again,
the word-developing or Arabian scheme, absurdly termed Semitic (from
Shem!), increased, multiplied, and perfected itself in Northern Africa
and Arabia, while the Turanian, becoming independent and specialised in
Akkadian, overspread Tartary and China.
And this one primæval language of Egypt framed for itself an alphabet
whence are derived all others. This is proved by the fact that each
and all begin, as Plutarch tells us old Coptic did, with the letter
A. Of its age in Nile-land we may judge from the cartouche containing
Khufu’s name, left by some workman on an inner block of the Great
Pyramid.[468] How many generations of articulate-speaking men must have
come and gone before so artificial and artistic a system as the Royal
Signature upon the Shield occurred to the human mind!
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