IN THE KHITAN LANGUAGES. 285 
India, Tartary, Siberia and Japan, and on this continent give name 
to their otherwise unknown architects, the Mound Builders. At 
Carchemish and Hamath, in Phrygia and Lydia, the Hittite hiero- 
glyphics strange and distinctive remain as monuments of Khitan 
empire and journeyings. The Cypriote syllabic notation has bor- 
rowed largely from them; the Libyan and Kelt-Iberian alphabets 
are their descendants. Some of the more characteristic symbols 
appear on rudely sculptured rocks in India; the alphabet of Corea 
preserves many forms identical with those of Hamath ; and, in this 
western world, the few surviving inscriptions of the Mound Builders 
are unmistakably Hittite, while the Aztec paleography is bunt an 
adaptation of the ancient symbolism of Syria to the productions and 
necessities of a new land. The Hittites of the Hebrew Scriptures 
are the Kheti of the Egyptian, and the Khita of the Assyrian 
records, the Ketei of Homer, who left their name to the Keteus river 
in Mysia, the Kathaei of the Punjaub, the Katei of Siberia, and the 
Khitan of Chinese history. When, in the 12th century, the 
Aculhua Tepanecs, traversing the length of the North American 
continent, arrived in Mexico within the borders of the Chichimee 
kingdom, they sought to conciliate its monarch Nopaltzin by the 
tidings that they belonged to the same ancient stock from which he 
was descended, that namely of the Citin, a race illustrious by its 
nobility and heroic deeds. Hamath, a Hittite word, yields its 
meaning only when we discover it in the native name of Japan 
which is Yama-to, the mountain door; and this again explains the 
Bible expression, ‘‘the entering in of Hamath.” Hittite colonists, 
or Greeks who had dwelt with Hittites in Asia Minor, carried the 
word into Europe as Haemus and Hymettus. The Kathaei carried 
it with them to India, where it became on Aryan lips Himavat, 
afterwards to change to Himalaya. Among the survivals of the 
ancient name on this continent I may mention Yuma, that of a tribe 
in south-western California to which, with the other members of the 
family so designated, I shall have occasion to refer more than once, 
and Yemez, the name of a Pueblo people of New Mexico. The 
languages of these two peoples are undoubtedly Khitan. Another 
group of Khitan names to which I can only briefly refer, as I have 
already directed attention to them in my paper on “ Hittites in 
America,” has been linked with the Kathaei by writers on Indian 
antiquities. These have supposed that the Kathaei and the Ksha- 
