|
All languages having sprung from one source, the original words from which they have been formed must have been of equal antiquity. That the Celtic and Teutonic languages in Europe are, in this sense, as old as the Chaldee and Hebrew, is a fact not only warranted by history and the common origin of Japheth and Shem, but susceptible of proof from the identity of many words yet existing in both stocks. But there is a marked difference between the Shemitic and Japhetic languages; for even when the radical words are unquestionably the same, the modifications, or infections and combinations which form the compounds, are, for the most part, different.
As it has been made a question which of the Shemitic languages is the most ancient, and much has been written to prove it to be the Hebrew, I will state briefly my opinion on what appears to me to be one of the plainest questions in the history of nations. We have for our certain guides. in determining this question — 1st, The historical narrative of facts in the Book of Genesis; and 2d, The known and uniform progress of languages, within the period of authentic profane history.
1. The Scripture informs us that before the dispersion, the whole earth was of one language and of one or the same speech; and that the descendants of Noah journeyed from the east, and settled on the plain of Shinar, or in Chaldea. The language used at that time, by the inhabitants of that plain, must then have been the oldest or the primitive language of man. This must have been the original Chaldee.
2. The Scripture informs us, that in consequence of the impious attempts of the people to build a city, and a tower whose top might reach to heaven, with a view to make themselves a name and prevent their dispersion, God interposed and confounded their language, so that they could not understand each other; in consequence of which they were dispersed “from thence over the face of all the earth.”
3. If the confusion of languages at Babel originated the differences which gave rise to the various languages of the families which separated at the dispersion, then those several languages are all of equal antiquity. Of these the Hebrew, as a distinct language, was not one; for the Hebrew nation was of posterior origin.
4. All the words of the several great races of men, both in Asia and Europe, which are vernacular in their several languages, and unequivocally the same, are of equal antiquity, as they must have been derived from the common Chaldee stock which existed before the dispersion. The words common to the Syrians and Hebrews, could not have been borrowed from the Hebrew; for the Hebrews originated from Heber and Abram, several centuries after Syria and Egypt were populous countries. This fact is attested by the Scripture history, which declares that when Abram migrated from Chaldea, and came into Canaan or Palestine, “the Canaanite was then in the land;” and when he returned from Egypt, “the Perizzite dwelt in the land.” These declarations, and the history of Abimelech, and of the war of four kings or chieftains with five; as also of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, prove Syria to have been at that time well peopled. The language of the inhabitants, then, must have been coeval with the nation, and long anterior to the Hebrew as a distinct dialect. It may be added, that in the early periods of the world, when no books existed, nations, living remote or distinct, never borrowed words from each other. One nation living in the midst of another, as the Hebrews did among the Egyptians, may adopt a single word, or a few words; but a family of words thus adopted, is an occurrence rarely or never known. The borrowing of words, in modern times, is almost wholly from the use of books.
5. It is probable that some differences of language were produced by the confusion; but neither that event nor any supernatural event is necessary to account for the differences of dialect or of languages now existing. The different modern languages of the Gothic or Teutonic stock, all originated in the natural course of events; and the differences are as great between them as they are between the languages of the Shemitic stock.
6. Soon after two races of men of a common stock have separated and placed themselves in distant countries, the language of each begins to diverge from that of the other, by various means. — 1. One tribe or nation will suffer one word to become obsolete and be forgotten; another, will suffer the loss of another; sometimes a whole family of words will be lost; at other times, a part only; at other times, a single word only of a numerous family will be retained by one nation, while another nation will retain the whole. 2. The same word will be differently applied by two distant races of men, and the difference will be so great as to obscure the original affinity. 3. Words will be compounded by two nations in a different manner, the same radical words taking a different prefix or suffix, in different languages. Thus wisdom in English is in German weisheit, [wise-head, wisehood,] from wise, weis. The English mislead is in Danish förleder, from lead, leder. 4. The pronunciation and orthography of words will often be so much changed, that the same word in two languages can not, without difficulty, be recognized as identical. No person, without a considerable attention to the changes which letters have suffered, would at once suspect or believe the English let and the French laisser to be the same word.
7. As Abram migrated from Chaldea, he must have spoken the Chaldee language; and probably, at that time, the Syriac, Arabic and Egyptian, had not become so different, as to render it impracticable for him to converse with the inhabitants of Palestine and Egypt. But the language of Abram’s descendants, and that of the land of Shinar or the Chaldee, must, in the natural course of things, have begun to diverge soon after the separation; and the changes in each language being different, would, in the course of a few centuries, form somewhat different languages. So in the days of Hezekiah, the Syriac and Hebrew had become, in a degree, distinct languages. 2 Kings xviii. In which of these languages the greatest number of alterations were produced, we do not know; but, from the general observations I have made in my researches, it appears that the Chaldee dialect, in the use of dental letters instead of sibilants, is much the most general in the Celtic and Teutonic languages of Europe. Thus the German only has a sibilant in wasser, when the other Teutonic languages have a dental, water. I think also that there are far more words in the European languages which accord with the Chaldee or Arabic, than there are words which accord with the Hebrew. If this observation is well founded, the Hebrew must have suffered the loss of more primitive words than the other languages of the Shemitic family. This, however, is true, that all of them have lost some words, and in some cases the Hebrew retains what the others have lost.
8. The Hebrew Scriptures are, by many centuries, the most ancient writings extant. Hence probably the strange inference, that the Hebrew is the oldest language; as if the inhabitants of Chaldea and Syria had had no language for ages before the progenitor of the Hebrews was born.
9. The vernacular words in the Celtic and Teutonic languages of modern Europe, which are evidently the same words as still exist in the Shemitic languages, are of the same antiquity; being a part of the common language which was used on the plain of Shinar, before the dispersion.
The descendants of Japheth peopled the northern part of Asia, and all Europe; or if some colonies from Egypt planted themselves in Greece at an early period, they or their descendants must have been merged in the mass of Japhetic population. Certain it is that the Greek language is chiefly formed on the same radical words as the Celtic and Teutonic languages.
The Japhetic tribes of men, whose descendants peopled the south and west of Europe, were first established in the country now called Persia, or, by the natives themselves, Iran. Of this fact, the evidence now existing is decisive. The numerous words found in the Greek, Latin, Gaelic, English and the kindred tongues, which are still used in Persia, prove, beyond all question, that Persia must have been the residence of the people whose descendants introduced into Europe the languages from which the modern languages are derived. The fact proves further, that a great body of the original Persians remained in their own country, and their descendants constitute the mass of the population at this day.
In the early stages of society, men dwelt or migrated in families, tribes, or clans. The family of Abraham and Jacob in Asia, and the clans of the Gaels in Scotland, exhibit to us the manner in which societies and nations were originally formed. The descendants of a man settled around him, and formed a clan, or tribe, of which the government was patriarchal. Such families often migrated in a body, and often the personal characteristics of the progenitor might be distinctly traced in his descendants for many generations. In process of time, some of these families became nations; more generally, by means of wars and migrations, different tribes blended, and the distinction of families was lost.
In rude ages, the families or tribes of men are named from some characteristic of the people; or, more generally, from the place of their residence. The Greeks gave the name of Scythia to the north of Europe and Asia, but the primitive inhabitants of the west of Europe they called , Kelts, Celts, a word signifying woods men.2 These were descendants from the same ancestors as the Greeks and Romans themselves, but they had pushed their migrations into Gaul, Spain and Britain. The first settlers or occupiers of these countries were driven forward by successive hords, until they were checked by the ocean; there they made their stand, and there we find their descendants at this day. These may be considered as the descendants of the earliest settlers or first inhabitants of the countries where they are found. Among these are the inhabitants of France, south of the Garonne, and those of the north of Spain, called by the Romans Aquitani and Cantabri, in more modern times Gascoigns, Basques, and Cantabrians, who still retain their native language; and in Great Britain, the Gaels in Scotland, and the natives of the north and west of Ireland, who also retain their primitive language.3
The first inhabitants of the north and west of Europe, known to the Greeks and Romans, to whom we are indebted for our earliest accounts of that region, were the Cimbri, who inhabited the peninsula of Denmark, now called Jutland, and the tribes which belonged to the Teutonic and Gothic races which were established in Germany and on both sides of the Baltic. Whether tribes of Celtic origin had overspread the latter countries before the arrival of the Gothic and Teutonic races, and all Europe had been inhabited by the Celts even to the borders of Sarmatia, has been a question much disputed by historians and antiquaries. The German and French writers generally contend that the Celts inhabited all the north of Europe, as far at least as Sarmatia; but some respectable English writers are of a different opinion. Now it is agreed that the Welsh are descendants of the Cimbri, inhabitants of Jutland; and their language bears a strong affinity to the Celtic languages which still exist; a fact that countenances the opinion of the German and French writers. But the dispute is of little moment: the Celtic, Teutonic and Gothic races being all of the Japhetic stock, migrating from Asia through Asia Minor at different times, and pursuing different courses westward. The first tribes probably sought the warm climates along the north coast of the Mediterranean, and established themselves in Greece and Italy. Others followed the course of the Danube and its subsidiary streams, till they fell upon the rivers that conducted them to the Baltic. The first inhabitants of Greece and Italy were probably of the Celtic race; but if they were, it is very evident that tribes of the Teutonic or Gothic races invaded those countries before they were civilized, and intermingled with the original inhabitants. The Pelasgi may have been among the number. This is an inference which I draw from the affinities of the Greek and Latin languages with those of Teutonic origin. The Teutonic and Gothic races impressed their language upon all the continent of Europe west of the Vistula, and from that river to the Rhine, or rather to the Seine, anterior to the conquest of Gaul by Julius Cesar. The same races invading and conquering the south of Europe, in the fourth and fifth centuries, on the downfall of the Roman empire, infused a portion of their language into the Italian and Spanish, which is still distinguishable.
The ancient Sarmatia, including Poland and Russia, was probably peopled originally by races of men who passed into Europe by the country north of the Euxine. Their original residence was along the rivers Kur and Araxes, or on the mountains between the Euxine and Caspian. The name of the Russ or Russians is clearly recognized in the Roxolani of Pliny and Ptolemy, and possibly the ancestors of this race may have entered Europe by Asia Minor. That the Teutonic races, originally from Persia, inhabited Asia Minor, and migrated westward by that course, is evident from the names which they impressed on mountains, rivers and places. Such are the Cragus of Pliny, the Welsh and English crag;4 Perga in Pamphylia, now burg or bergen; Thymbreck, the name of a small stream, near the site of Troy; a word in which we recognize the English brook; it was contracted by the Greeks into Thymbrius.5
It is admitted by all gentlemen acquainted with oriental literature, that the Sanscrit, or ancient language of India, the parent of all the dialects of that great peninsula, is radically the same language or from the same stock as the Greek and Latin; the affinities between them being remarkably clear and decisive. If so, the inhabitants of India and the descendants of the Celtic and Teutonic nations are all of one family, and must have all migrated from one country after the separation of the nations of the Shemitic stock from those of the Japhetic race.6
Whether that country was Persia, or Cashmir, or a country further east, is a point not easily determined. One important inference results from this fact, that the white men of Europe and the black or tawny men of India, are direct descendants from a common ancestor.
Of the languages of Europe, the Greek was first improved and refined, and next to that the Latin. The affinity between these languages and those of the west and north of Europe is very striking, and demonstrates their common origin. It is probable, however, that there are some words in the Greek derived from Africa, if Egyptian colonies were established in Greece, as historians inform us.
The modern Italian, Spanish, French and Portuguese, are composed chiefly of Latin words, much altered, however, both in orthography and inflections. Perhaps nine tenths of all the words now found in those languages, are of Latin origin; being introduced by the Romans, who held Gaul in subjection five or six centuries, and Spain much longer; or being borrowed from Latin authors, since the revival of letters. All these languages, however, retain many words of Celtic origin; the primitive language not having been entirely extirpated. In some instances, the same word has been transmitted through both channels, the Celtic and the Latin, and is yet retained. Thus in French céder, and in Italian cedere, is directly from the Latin cedo; while the French congedier, and Italian congedare, are composed of the same word, with a prefix, derived from the Celtic, and retained in the Welsh gadaw, to quit, to leave, [L. concedo.) And this same verb probably appears also in quit, a word common to the Teutonic and to the Celtic languages. See Conge in the Dictionary.
It must be observed further, that the Spanish language contains some words of African origin, introduced by the Carthaginians before the Roman conquest of Spain, or afterward by the Moors, who for several centuries, were masters of that country. It contains also some words of Gothic origin, introduced by the Goths who conquered that country, at the downfall of the Roman Empire. The French also contains some words of Teutonic origin, either from the Belgic tribes who occupied the country to the Seine at the time of Cesar’s invasion, or from the Franks who established the dynasty of the Merovingian kings in the fifth century, or from the Normans who obtained possession of the northern part of that kingdom in the tenth century, or from all these sources.
The German, Dutch or Belgic, Anglo-Saxon, Danish and Swedish languages, are of Teutonic or Gothic origin.7 They are all closely allied; a great part of the words in them all being the same or from the same roots, with different prefixes or affixes. There is, however, a greater difference between the Danish and Swedish, which are of the Gothic stock, and the German and Dutch, which are of Teutonic origin, than between two languages of the same stock, as between the Danish and Swedish. The Norwegian, Icelandic, and some of the languages or dialects of Switzerland, belong to the same stock; but of these I have no particular knowledge.
The Basque or Cantabrian in Spain; the Gaelic in the north of Scotland, and the Hiberno-Celtic or native language of Ireland, are the purest remains of the ancient Celtic. From a comparison of a vocabulary of the Gaelic and Hiberno-Celtic, I find little or no difference between them; and from a long and attentive examination of this language, and of the languages of Teutonic origin, I find less difference between them than most authors have supposed to exist.
The Armoric or language of Brittany in the northwest angle of France, and the Cornish, in the southwest of England, are also of Celtic origin. The Cornish is now extinct; but the Armoric is a living language.
The English, as now spoken, is a language composed of words from several others. The basis of the language is Anglo-Saxon, or, as I shall, for the sake of brevity, call it, Saxon, by which it is closely allied to the languages of Teutonic and Gothic origin on the continent. But it retains a great number of words from ancient languages of Britain, the Belgic or Lloegrian, and the Cymraeg or Welsh, particularly from the latter, and some from the Cornish. Cesar informs us that before he invaded Britain, Belgic colonies had occupied the southern coast of England; and the inhabitants of the interior, northern and western parts, were the ancestors of the present Welsh, who call themselves Cymry, and their country Cymru, a name which indicates their origin from the Cimbri, inhabitants of the modern Denmark, or Cimbric Chersonese, now Jutland.
The modern Welsh contains many Latin words introduced by the Romans, who had possession of Britain for five hundred years. But the body of the language is probably their vernacular tongue.. It is more nearly allied to the languages of Celtic origin, than to those of the Teutonic and Gothic stock; and of this British language, the Cornish and Armoric are dialects.
It has been commonly supposed that the Britons were nearly exterminated by the Saxons, and that the few that survived, escaped into the west of England, now Wales. It is true that many took refuge in Wales, which their descendants still retain; but it can not be true that the other parts of England were entirely depopulated. On the other hand, great numbers must have escaped slaughter, and been intermixed with their Saxon conquerors. The Welsh words, which now form no unimportant part of the English language, afford decisive evidence of this fact. It is probable, however, that these words were for a long time used only by the common people, for few of them appear in the early Saxon writers.
The English contains also many words introduced by the Danes, who were for some time masters of England; which words are not found in the Saxon. These words prevail most in the northern counties of England; but many of them are incorporated into the body of the language.
After the Conquest, the Norman kings endeavored to extirpate the English language, and substitute the Norman. For this purpose, it was ordained that all law proceedings and records should be in the Norman language; and hence the early records and reports of law cases came to be written in Norman. But neither royal authority, nor the influence of courts, could change the vernacular language. After an experiment of three hundred years, the law was repealed; and since that period, the English has been, for the most part, the official, as well as the common language of the nation. A few Norman words, however, remain in the English; most of them in law language.
Since the Conquest, the English has not suffered any shock from the intermixture of conquerors with the natives of England; but the language has undergone great alterations, by the disuse of a large portion of Saxon words, and the introduction of words from the Latin and Greek languages, with some French, Italian, and Spanish words. These words have, in some instances, been borrowed by authors directly from the Latin and Greek; but most of the Latin words have been received through the medium of the French and Italian. For terms in the sciences, authors have generally resorted to the Greek; and from this source, as discoveries in science demand new terms, the vocabulary of the English language is receiving continual augmentation. We have also a few words from the German and Swedish, mostly terms in mineralogy; and commerce has introduced new commodities of foreign growth or manufacture, with their foreign names, which now make a part of our language. — Such are camphor, amber, arsenic, and many others.
The English then is composed of,
1st, Saxon and Danish words of Teutonic and Gothic origin.
2nd, British or Welsh, Cornish and Armoric, which may be considered as of Celtic origin.
3rd, Norman, a mixture of French and Gothic.
4th, Latin, a language formed on the Celtic and Teutonic.
5th, French, chiefly Latin corrupted, but with a mixture of Celtic.
6th, Greek, formed on the Celtic and Teutonic, with some Coptic.
7th, A few words directly from the Italian, Spanish, German, and other languages of the continent.
8th, A few foreign words, introduced by commerce, or by political and literary intercourse.
Of these, the Saxon words constitute our mother tongue; being words which our ancestors brought with them from Asia. The Danish and Welsh also are primitive words, and may be considered as a part of our vernacular language. They are of equal antiquity with the Chaldee and Syriac.
AFFINITY OF LANGUAGES.
On comparing the structure of the different languages of the Shemitic and Japhetic stocks, we can not but be struck with the fact, that although a great number of words consisting of the same or of cognate letters, and conveying the same ideas, are found in them all; yet in the inflections, and in the manner of forming compounds and derivatives, there are remarkable differences between the two great families. In the modifications of the verb, for expressing person, time, and mode, very little resemblance is observable between them. If we could prove that the personal terminations of the verb, in the Japhetic languages, were originally pronouns, expressive of the persons, we should prove an affinity between the words of the two races in a most important particular. Some attempts of this kind have been made, but not with very satisfactory results.8
In the formation of nouns, we recognize a resemblance between the English termination th, in birth, truth, drouth, [Saxon drugothe,] warmth, &c.;, and the Shemitic terminations ית and ות; and the old plural termination en, retained in oxen, and the Welsh plural, ending ion, coincide nearly with the Arabic termination of the dual number ن ا an, and the regular masculine plural termination وُن on, as well as with the Chaldee, Hebrew, and Syriac ין in. And it is justly remarked by Mitford, that in the variety of plural terminations of nouns, there is a striking resemblance between the Arabic and the Welsh. There is one instance, in the modern languages of Teutonic origin, in which we find the Arabic nunnation: — this is the German and Dutch binnen, the Saxon binnan or binnon, signifying within, Hebrew and Chaldee ין ב Ar. بَيْنَ bin, without the mark of nunnation when it signifies within; but when it signifies separation, space, interval, the original sense, it is written بَيْنٌ, and pronounced, with the nunnation, like the Teutonic word binnon. |