Arabic and most elegant dresses are piled up in wild confusion. Language. Our beau is here distressed with variety; but to be able to choose the most handsome and most becoming, he must have received from nature a superior good taste; which he must likewise have cultivated by assiduous industry, and by associating with the most genteel company.

56

The orations of the Arabs were of two kinds, metrical and prosaic. The former they compared to pearls set in gold, and the latter to loose ones. They were ambitious of excelling in both; and whoever did so, was highly distinguished. His success in either of those departments was thought to confer honour, not only on his family, but even on his tribe. In their poems were preserved the genealogies of their families, the privileges of their tribes, the memory of their heroes, the exploits of their ancestors, the propriety of their language, the magnificence of banquets, the generosity of their wealthy chiefs and great men, &c. After all, we cannot avoid being of the unpopular opinion, that this mighty parade of eloquence and poetry did not reach backward above two centuries before the birth of Mohammed, as it certainly vanished at the era of the propagation of his religious institutions. The two succeeding centuries were the reigns of superstition and bloodshed. The voice of the muses is seldom heard amidst the din of arms.

The ancient Arabs, at whatever time poetry began to be in request among them, did not at first write poems of considerable length. They only expressed themselves in metre occasionally, in acute rather than harmonious strains. The Proverbs of Solomon, and the book of Ecclesiastes seem to be composed in this species of versification. The prosody of the Arabs was never digested into rules till some time after the death of Mohammed; and this is said to have been done by Al Khalti al Farabidi, who lived in the reign of the caliph Harun al Raschid.

After so many encomiums on the copiousness of the Arabic tongue, one class of our readers may possibly expect that we should subjoin a brief detail of its genius and character; and this we shall do with all possible brevity.

Genius and All the primary or radical words of the language character are composed of different combinations of consonants of the lan- by triads; so that the various combinations and conguage. junctions of radicals make more than 10,000, even without including those which may arise from the meeting of guttural letters. From this quality of the language has flowed that stability of the dialect which has preserved it pure and entire for so many thousand years, and secured it from those changes and that fluctuation to which most other tongues are subject.

Perhaps, notwithstanding its copiousness and variety, no other language can vie with the one in question in point of perspicuity and precision. It is possessed of a brevity and rotundity which, amidst the greatest variety, enables it to express with clearness and energy what could not be expressed in any other tongue without tedious circumlocutions. To this purpose we shall beg leave to transcribe a passage from Bishop Pococke's oration on the Arabic language. As we imagine few of our readers who will have the curiosity to peruse this article can be unacquainted with the Latin tongue, VOL. XVI. Part I.

we shall give it as it stands in the original, without a translation:

"Neque in nulla certe laudis parte, mira illa qua, non solum verborum in significando, perspicuitate, sed in prolatione, elegantiæ et dulcedini caverunt, sedulitas; quoque, non solum accurata, inter literas ex significata proportione, sensus sel intensioni, vel remissioni, prout res postulaverit, literarum appositione, subductione, vel juxta organorum, rationem prospexerunt; sed et ne quid delicatulis auribus ingratum, ne quid horridum, aut covμpavor, reperiatur, effecerunt. Hoc in genere est, quod nuspiam in verbo aliquo, genuinæ apud Arabes originis, concurrunt, non intercedente vocalis alicujus motione consonantes, cum vel tres, vel plures, aliis in linguis frequenter collidantur. Immo neque, si adsint, quæ asperitati remedio sint, vocales, quas libet temerè tamen committunt consonantes; sed ita rei natura postulat, ut concurrere debeant illa, quæ se invicem, sine asperitatis inductione consequi, et inter se connecti non possint; illi vel situs, vel literarum mutatione, eas abjiciendo, inserendo, emolliendo, aliisve quibus possent modis, remedia quærunt; adeo ab omni, quod vel absonum, vel dissonum est, abhorrent. Quod si nobis secus videntur, et asperius sonare ab Arabibus prolata, illud auribus nostris, et usui, non linguæ imputandum, nec mollius illis sonare nostra, quam eorum nobis censendum. Quin et gutturalium, quæ nobis maxima asperitatis causa videntur, absentiam, ut magnum in lingua Græca defectum, arguunt Arabes."

The learned Dr Hunt, late professor of the Hebrew and Arabic languages at Oxford, is of the same opinion with the very learned prelate, part of whose oration we have transcribed above, with respect to the delicacy and elegance of the Arabian language:-" Nusquam, mihi credite, (inquit ille) auribus magis parcitur quam in Arabia; nulla lingua à zaxopane, alienior quam Arabi

ca.

Quamquam enim nonnullæ ejus literæ minus fortasse suaviter, immo durius etiam sonuerint, ita tamen Arabes eas temperarunt cum lenibus, duras cum mollibus, graves cum acutis miscendo, voces inde non minus auribus jucundæ, quam pronunciatu faciles confecerint, totique sermoni miram sonorum tam dulcedinem quam varietatem addiderint. Quod quidem orationis modulandæ studium in Corano adeo manifestum est, ut primi Islamismi oppugnatores eum librum magica ideo arte scriptum dixerint. Non auribus tantum gratus est Ara bismus, sed et animi conceptibus exprimendis aptus, sonos suos sententiis semper accommodans, et felici verborum junctura eorum naturam depingens."

To these we might add quotations from Erpenius's oration on the same subject, from Golius, Schultens, Hottinger, Bochart, and Sir William Jones; besides a whole cloud of oriental witnesses, whose extravagant encomiums would rather astonish than edify the far greater part of our readers. These panegyrics may perhaps be in some measure hyperbolical; but in general we believe them pretty well founded. At the same time we are convinced that the Arabic, however melodious in ears of a native, sounds harsh and unharmonious in that of an European.

Arabic Language.

57

When we consider the richness and variety of the Difficulty Arabic tongue, we are led to conclude, that to ac- of acquir quire a tolerable degree of skill in its idioms, is a more ing a thorough difficult task than is generally imagined; at least some knowledge ૨૧ people of it.

Arabic

people who have acquired the knowledge of the Greek Language. and Latin, and likewise of the more fashionable modern languages, with facility enough, have found it so. Be that as it may, there are two classes of men who, in our opinion, cannot handsomely dispense with the knowledge of that almost universal tongue: the gentleman, who is to be employed in the political transactions of the most respectable mercantile company upon earth, in the eastern parts of the world; and the divine, who applies himself to investigate the true purport of the sacred oracles without this, the former will often find himself embarrassed in both his civil and mercantile negociations; and the latter will often grope in the dark, when a moderate acquaintance with that tongue would make all sunshine around him.

Bochart, Hottinger, Schultens, Pocock, Hunt, and Robertson, &c. have taken wonderful pains, and lavished a profusion of learning, in proving the affinity and dialectical cognation between the Hebrew and Arabic. Much of this labour, we think, might have been spared. We presume to affirm, that no person tolerably versed in both languages can read a single paragraph of the Arabic version of the New Testament, or indeed of the Koran itself, without being convinced of the truth of this position it is but stripping the latter of its adventitious frippery, and the kindred features will immediately appear.

The learned professors of the university of Leyden were the first who entered upon the career of Arabian learning. To them the European students are principally indebted for what knowledge of that language they have hitherto been able to attain. Though several Italians have contributed their endeavours, yet the fruit of their labours has been rendered almost useless by more commodious and more accurate works printed in Holland.

The palm of glory, in this branch of literature, is due to Golius, whose works are equally profound and elegant; so perspicuous in method, that they may always be consulted without fatigue, and read without languor. Erpenius's excellent grammar, and his memorable dictionary, will enable the student to explain the history of Taimur by Ibni Arabshah. If he has once mastered that sublime work, he will understand the learned Arabic better than most of the Khatabs of Constantinople or of Mecca.

The Arabian language, however, notwithstanding all its boasted perfections, has undoubtedly shared the fate of other living languages; it has gradually undergone such considerable alterations, that the Arabic spoke and written in the age of Mohammed may be now regarded as a dead language: it is indeed so widely different from the modern language of Arabia, that it is taught and studied in the college of Mecca just as the Latin is at Rome.

The dialect of the Highlands of Yemen is said to have the nearest analogy to the language of the Koran, because these Highlanders have little intercourse with strangers. The old Arabic is through all the East, like the Latin in Europe, a learned tongue, taught in col-, leges, and only to be acquired by the perusal of the best authors.

The Chaldeans, or Chasidim, as they are always call-guages. ed in Scripture, were the descendants of Chesed the son of Nahor, the brother of Abraham. The descendants of this patriarch drove the Cushim or Arabians out of Babylonia, and possessed themselves of that country at a very early period. As these Chasidim or Chaldeans were the posterity of Nahor, the descendant of Heber, they undoubtedly spoke the original Hebrew tongue as well as the other branches of that family. But being an ingenious inventive people, they seem to have polished their language with much care and delicacy of taste.

The only genuine remains of the ancient Chaldaic language are to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures; and those are contained in 268 verses, of which we have 200 in Daniel, reaching from verse 4th chapter 2d to chapter 8th exclusive; in Ezra 67, in chapter 4th, 17 verses; chapter 5th, the same number; chapter 6th, 18 verses; and in chapter 7th, 15: in Jeremiah, chapter 10th, these is extant only one verse. From these fragments, compared with the Hebrew, it plainly appears, that the difference between that language and the Chaldaic is scarce equal to that between the Doric and Ionic dialects of the Greek.

Whatever might have been the form of the most ancient Chaldaic letters, it is generally known that the beautiful square characters, in which the Hebrew Scriptures began to be written after the age of Ezra, were current among them at an era prior to the Babylonish captivity. Those elegant characters were probably the invention of the Chaldean academies, which were established in various parts of that extensive and fertile country.

59

The Chaldean declensions and conjugations differ so Chaldean little from the Hebrew modifications, that it would be differs little almost superfluous to dwell upon them in this section. from the The most effectual way to acquire an idea of the an- Hebrew. cient Chaldaic, is to decompound the names confessedly of that dialect, which occur in many places of Scripture. By this method of proceeding, its beautiful struc ture and expressive energy will be readily comprehended even by the most illiterate classes of our readers. At the same time, we must observe, that the Chaldaic and ancient Syriac bore so near a resemblance to each other, that they have generally been classed under one

head.

The first Chaldaic word that occurs in the Old Testament is bara "creavit." This word has all along been assigned to the language under consideration; for what reason, we confess we are not able to discover. The greatest part of the Hebrew tongue is now lost. The words bar, "a son," and bara "creavit," (rather filiavit), may probably be of that number. Another. Scripture word which is often quoted, and always ascribed either to the Syriac or Chaldaic, is igar or jegar sahadutha,

Chaldean sahadutha, which signifies a mountain of witnesses." Language, Every body knows, that when Jacob and Laban made &c. their compact, the latter denominated the heap of stones reared upon that occasion in this manner; while the former called it Galeed, as we now write and pronounce it. This pronunciation, however, does not appear to us altogether genuine. The word is probably compounded of 55, gal, cumulus, "a heap," and ", chad, æternitas, seculum, "eternity, an age:" so that, galchad, or galaad as it came to be written afterwards, signified an" everlasting heap." Laban then had respect to the end for which the monument was erected; but Jacob alluded to its duration. It appears, however, upon this and every other occasion, when Chaldaic words are mentioned, that &, a, was a favourite letter both with the Syrians and Chaldeans. We may likewise observe, that the same people always changed the Hebrew w, shin, into, thau, in order to avoid the serpentine sound of that consonant.

60

Its proper The Chaldaic names of gods, men, places, &c. which names pure occur in Scripture, appear to be no other than HeHebrew. brew polished and improved. Bel, Belus in Latin, is evidently, Baal, or we think rather by, Bechel. The Phoenicians, and sometimes the Hebrews, used it to signify the most high. The Chaldeans used their word Bel for the same purpose; and because this word originally imported the High One, they dignified their first monarch with that name. They denominated their capital city Ba-Bel, which imports the temple of Bel, and afterwards Babylon, which intimates the abode or dwelling of our lord the sun. Nebo was a name of the moon among the Babylonians, derived from the Hebrew *, nabah, vaticinari, "to prophecy." Azer was the planet Mars, from 98, Azer or Ezur, accinxit, "to gird," alluding to the girding on of arms. Ahad was an As* Merob. syrian name of the sun a word deduced from the lib. i. c. 23. Hebrew TM, ahad, unus, 66 one." Nelzar was the name + Pococke of an Arabian idol †, which often occurs in the comSpecim. position of Babylonian names. In Arabic it signifies Hist. Arab. an eagle: we think, however, that the word is the Hebrew, natzar, custodivit, servavit, "to keep, to preserve." To these names of deities many more might be added, which the nature of our design will not allow us to mention.

*

Almost all the Chaldean proper names which occur either in sacred or profane history are evidently of Hebrew original, or cognate with that language. We shall subjoin a few examples: Nabonassar is evidently compounded of Nabo and nazur, both Hebrew words. Nabopollazar is made up of Nabo-Pul, the same with Bel, and Azer or Azor, above explained. Belesis is made up of Bel and xwx, Esha, "fire." Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Beltishazzar, Neriglissar, Nebuzaradan, Rabmag, Rabsaris, Nergal Sharezer, Rabshakeh, Ezarhaddon, Merodach, Evil Merodach, and numberless others, are so manifestly reducible to Hebrew vocables, when decompounded, that the oriental scholar will readily distinguish them.

Names of places in the Chaldaic are likewise so nearly Hebrew, that nothing but the dialectical tone separates them. Thus Ur of the Chaldeans is actually ", light, that city being sacred to the sun: Sippora is plainly the Hebrew word Zipporah; Carchemish, a city on the Euphrates, is evidently compounded of Kir or Kar, a city," and Chemosh, a name of the sun. In short,

66

every Chaldean or old Syrian word now extant, with Chaldean out any difficulty, bewray their Hebrew original. As Language, for their dialectical differences, these we remit to the &c. Chaldaic grammars and lexicons.

61

Hebrew.

We now proceed to the consideration of the Phoeni- Phoenician cian language, which is known to have been that of the language ancient Canaanites. That this was one of the original derived dialects, and consequently a cognate of the Hebrew, is from the universally acknowledged. Instead therefore of endeavouring to prove this position, we may refer our readers to the works of the learned Mr Bochart, where that author has in a manner demonstrated this point, by deriving almost all the names of the Phoenician colonies from the Hebrew, upon the supposition that the dialect of those people was closely connected with that tongue. St Augustine, de Civitate Dei, has observed, that even in his time many of the vulgar in the neighbourhood of Carthage and Hippo spoke a dialect of the old Punic which nearly resembled the Hebrew. Procopius, de bello Goth. informs us, that there existed even in his days in Africa a pillar with this inscription in Hebrew, "We flee from the face of Joshua the robber, the son of Nun." The names of all the ancient cities built by the Carthaginians on the coast of Africa are easily reducible to a Hebrew original. The Carthaginian names of persons mentioned in the Greek and Latin History, such as Himilco, Hamilcar, Asdrubal, Hannibal, Hanno, Dido, Anna or Hannah, Sophonisba, Gisgo, Maharbal, Adherbal, &c. all breathe a Hebrew extraction.

The Greeks borrowed a great part of their religious worship from the people of whose language we are treating; of consequence, the names of most of their gods are Phoenician. Almost every one of these is actually Hebrew, as might easily be shown. The names of persons and places mentioned in the fragments of Sanchoniathon, preserved by Eusebius, are all of Hebrew complexion. The names mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures of places which belonged to the Canaanites prior to the invasion of the Israelites under Joshua, are as much Hebrew as those which were afterwards substituted in their stead. The Punic scene in Plautus has been analysed by Bochart and several other learned men, by whom the language has been clearly proved to be deduced from the Hebrew, with some dialectical variations.

The island of Melita (now Malta) was inhabited by a colony of Phoenicians many ages before the Moors took possession of it. Among the vulgar of that island many Punic vocables are current to this day, all which may be readily traced up to the Hebrew fountain. To these we may add many inscriptions on stones, coins, medals, &c. which are certainly Phoenician, and as certainly of Hebrew extraction. We have thrown together these few hints without pursuing them to any great length, as we deemed it unnecessary to dwell long on a point so hackneyed and so generally acknowledged.

62

Before we proceed to treat of the ancient language Origin of of the Ethiopians, we find ourselves obliged to hazard the Ethioa few strictures on the origin of that ancient nation. pians. If we can once settle that single point, the discovery will open an avenue to their primitive dialect, the article about which we are chiefly concerned in the present discussion.

In our Section concerning the Hebrew language, we were led often to mention the patriarch Cush the eldest son of Ham. The posterity of this family chief, under ૨૧૩

his

&c.

& c.

+ Antiq.

0.7.

In process of time, the posterity of Chasid or Chesed, called Chasdim or Chasidim, in the east, and Chal deans in the west, drove out the Cushim, and seized upon their country. The Cushim retired westward, and spread themselves over that part of Arabia situated towards the south-east. They probably extended themselves over all the eastern part of that peninsula, from the sea to the wilderness between Arabia and Syria. Those were the Ethiopians mentioned in Scripture by a very unpardonable inadvertency of our translators. These, then, we think, were the primitive Cushim.

Josephus informs us †, that all the Asiatics called the Jud. lib. i. Ethiopians of Africa by the name of Cushim. This denomination was not given them without good reason: it imports at least, that they deemed them the descendants of Cush; it being the constant practice of the orientals in the early ages to denominate nations and tribes from the name of their great patriarch or founder. The name Cushim must then have been given to the Ethiopians, from a persuasion that they were the progeny of the son of Ham who bore that name. By what route soever the Cushim penetrated into that region of Africa which was called by that name, it may be taken for granted that they were the descendants of Cush above mentioned.

63

Their lan

guage ori ginally Chaldean.

It has been observed above, that the posterity of Cush possessed the country of Shinar or Chaldea at a very early period, but were expelled by the Chasidim or Chaldeans. Upon this catastrophe, or perhaps somewhat later, a colony from the fugitive Cushim transported themselves from the south and south-east coast of Arabia over the sea which lies between that country and Ethiopia. However imperfect the art of navigation might be in that age, the distance was so small that they might easily enough make a voyage cross that narrow sea in open boats, or perhaps in canoes. However that may have been, it cannot be doubted that the tribes on both sides of that branch of the sea were kindred nations.

If, then, both the northern and southern Cushim sprung from the same stock, there can be no doubt that both spoke the same language. The language of the Babylonian Cushim was Chaldaic, and of consequence that of the Ethiopian Cushim was the same. We may therefore rest assured, that whatever changes the Ethiopian dialect may have undergone in the course of 3000 years, it was originally either Chaldaic, or at least a branch of that language. Scaliger informs us, that the Ethiopians call themselves Chaldeans; and that, says, he not without reason, because of those many sacred and profane books which are extant among them, the most

The vulgar letters of the Ethiopians, according to Diodorus Siculus, were the same with the sacred †† Lib. iii, characters of the Egyptians (D). From this account, if the Sicilian may be trusted, the sacred letters of these Steph. people, concerning which so many wise conjectures have been formed, were actually Chaldaic. To carry on this investigation a little farther, we may observe, that Sir William Jones seems to have proved, by very plausible arguments, that the Sanscrit characters were deduced from the Chaldaic. This circumstance affords a presumption that the Ethiopian Cushim were likewise concerned with the Egyptians; who, as is remarked in the Section concerning the Sanscrit, probably introduced the religion of the Brahmans into Hindostan. This is advanced as a conjecture only; and yet when we consider the affinity between the Egyptian and Gentoo religions, we are strongly inclined to hope that this surmise may one day be verified by undeniable facts.

64

tercourse

The original Ethiopians were a people highly civilized; their laws, their institutions, and especially their religion, were celebrated far and wide. Homer talks in raptures of the piety of the Ethiopians, and sends his gods every now and then to revel 12 days with that devout people. The Sicilian adduces a number of very specious arguments to prove that these two nations bad sprung from the same stock. He mentions a similarity Ancient in of features, of manners, of customs, of laws, of letters, between of the fabrication of statues, of religion, as evidences of the Ethiothe relation between those two neighbouring nations. plans and There was, every body knows, a communion, as to sa- Egyptians cred rites, between the two countries. The Egyptians sent annually a deputation of their priests, furnished with the portable statues of their gods, to visit the fanes of the devout Ethiopians. Upon this occasion, a solemn religious banquet was prepared, which lasted 12 days, and of which the priests of both nations were partakers. It was, we imagine, a kind of sacramental institution, by which both parties publicly avouched their agreement in the ceremonies of their religion respectively. These observations plainly show, that the most ancient Ethiopians were a people highly civilized; indeed so much, that the Egyptians were at one time contented to be their scholars. The tone of their language was certainly the same with that of the Chaldeans or Arabian Cushim, from whom they are descended. We know not whether there are any books in the ancient Ethiopic now extant; so that it is not easy to produce instances of its coincidence with the Chaldaic. Diogenes Laertius informs us, that Thrasyllus, in his ca

+ Lib. ix, p. 461. talogue Casaub.

"That

Chaldean talogue of the books composed by Democritus, menLanguage, tions one, #igi Twy w Megon isgar ygauμxtwv, concerning &c. the sacred letters in the island of Meroe (E); and another concerning the sacred letters in Babylon. Had these books survived the ravages of time, they would in this age of research and curiosity have determined not only the point under our consideration, but the affinity of sacred rites among the Chaldeans, Ethiopians, and Egyptians.

We have now shown that the Ethiopians were a colony of Cushites; that the Cushites were originally Sovereigns of Shinar or Chaldea, and consequently spoke either Chaldaic, or a dialect of that tongue; that their colonists must have used the same language; that the ancient Ethiopians were a people highly polished, and celebrated in the most early ages on account of their virtue and piety. It has likewise appeared that the common letters of that people were the sacred characters of the Egyptians, These letters, we imagine, were the Cuphite; for which ace the section on the Arabic. When they were discarded, and the modern substituted in their room, cannot be determined; nor is it, we apprehend, a matter of much importance. We shall therefore drop that part of the subject, and refer our curious and inquisitive readers to the very learned Job Ludolf's (F) excellent grammar and dictionary of the Abyssinian or Geez tongue, where they will find every thing worth knowing on that subject. We shall endeavour to gratify our readers with a very brief account of the modern Ethiopic or Ethiopic Abyssinian tongue; for which both they and we will be obliged to James Bruce, Esq. that learned, indefatigable, and adventurous traveller; who, by his observations on that country, which he made in person, often at the hazard of his life, has discovered, as it were, a new world both to Europe and Asia.

65

Modern

tongues.

The most ancient language of Ethiopia, which we shall now call Abyssinia (its modern name), according to that gentleman, was the Geez, which was spoken by the ancient Cushite shepherds. This, we should think, approaches nearest to the old Chaldaic. Upon a revolution in that country, the court resided many years in the province of Amhara, where the people spoke a different language, or at least a very different dialect of the same language. During this interval, the Geez, or language of the shepherds, was dropt, and retained only in writing, and as a dead language: the sacred Scriptures being in that tongue only saved it from going into disuse. This tongue is exceedingly harsh and unharmonious. It is full of these two letters D and T, in which an accent is put that nearly resembles stammering. Considering the small extent of sea that divides this country from Arabia, we need not wonder that it has great affinity with the Arabic. It is not difficult to be acquired by those who understand any other of the oriental languages; and as the roots of many Hebrew words are only to be found here, it seems to be absolutely necessary to all those who wish to obtain a critical skill in that language.

66 Ethiopie The Ethiopic alphabet consists of 26 letters, each of alphabet. which, by a virgula or point annexed, varies its sound

&c.

in such a manner as that those 26 form as it were 62 Chaldean distinct letters. At first they had but 25 of these origi- Language, nal letters, the Latin P being wanting: so that they were obliged to substitute another letter in its place. Paulus, for example, they call Taulus, Aulus, or Caulus: Petros, they pronounced Ketros. At last they substituted T, and added this to the end of their alphabet; giving it the force of P, though it was really a repetition of a character rather than the invention of a new one. Besides these, there are 20 others of the nature of diphthongs; but some of them are probably not of the same antiquity with the letters of the alphabet, but have been invented in later times by the scribes for convenience.

The Amharic, during the long banishment of the royal family in Shoa, became the language of the court, and seven new characters were of necessity added to answer the pronunciation of this new language; but no book was ever written in any other language than Geez. There is an old law in the country, banded down by tradition, that whoever shall attempt to translate the Holy Scripture into Amharic or any other language, his throat shall be cut after the manner in which they kill sheep, his family sold to slavery, and their houses razed to the ground.

Before we leave this subject, we may observe, that all the ancients, both poets and historians, talk of a double race of Ethiopians; one in India, and another in Africa. What may have given rise to this opinion it is not easy to discover. Perhaps the swarthy complexion of both people may have led them to this sentiment. Eusebius indeed informs us ‡, that "a nume-‡ Chron. rous colony of people emigrated from the banks of the p. 12. Indus, and, crossing the ocean, fixed their residence in the country now called Ethiopia." For our part, we are rather inclined to believe, that the original Ethiopians transported themselves into India, and there perhaps co-operated with the Egyptians in digging the excavations and framing the statues, some of which are still to be seen in that country, and which we have mentioned in another Section. The Greeks called those people Adiones, Ethiopes, we believe, from their sun-burnt countenance; but indeed they were very little acquainted either with the country or its inhabitants. The most ancient name of Egypt was Mizraim, of Ancient consequence the Arabians still call it Mesri. It was of Egypt a language likewise distinguished by other names, such as Oceana, sister diaAeria, &c. It appears from the sacred historian, that it lect of was inhabited by the descendants of Mizraim the second Hebrew. son of Ham. Mizraim had several sons, who, according to the Scripture account, settled respectively in that country. If we trust to the sacred records, there will be little difficulty in ascertaining the language of the Mizraim. It will appear to be one of the sister dialects of the Hebrew, Phoenician, Arabic, Chaldaic, &c.; and this, to us, appears to be the fact. But the origin of that people, their language, religion, laws, and institutions, have been so warped and confounded, both by their own historians and those of other countries, that one is scarce able to determine what to believe or what

to

67