TWENTY-THIRD ORDINARY MEETING. 287 
The Assyrian plural forms are anu, wnuw and utu, from which the 
Egyptian forms may have come by modification or contraction. The 
final vowel, however, is the same in both languages. 
The most common form of the Assyrian plural, however, is ¢ or %, 
which is simply the Hebrew im with the final consonant omitted, 
and there are even examples of this plural form in Hebrew without 
the final m. 
In the forms of the numerals there is an evident trace of close 
family relationship between the Ancient Egyptian and the Semitic 
languages. It is not so evident in them all, but is quite distinct in 
afew. And here it seems to me we might naturally expect to find 
greater difference of form. The Egyptians, from their mental bias, 
their national public works, and their social customs, continually 
made use of their numerals. In the measurement of land, in the com- 
putations regarding the rise and fall of the Nile, in their architecture 
and elementary astronomy, they would require frequently to use the 
numerals. Besides, on the walls of tombs and temples, scribes are 
seen noting down on their tablet the possessions of the Egyptian 
noblemen, or the spoils and prisoners of war. In such circumstances, 
and among such a people, we might expect a prior? a considerable 
divergency between the Egyptian forms of the numerals and those 
of the Semitic and Aryan tongues. 
The following table will show the close relationship, however, of a 
few of the numerals : 
EGYPTIAN. HEB. SANSKRIT. ASSYRIAN. GREEK. Lat. GERM. 
ud one KEchad eka akhadu or edu & unus ein 
sen two Shenayim sanie 
ses s1x Shishah shash sisatu && sex sechs 
sefekh seven Shivah  saptan  sibittu éxrad septem __ sieben 
In the Hebrew for two, the dual form is used, which if we remove, 
the form then will remain almost identical with the Egyptian. If 
we take the Hebrew form for six which is employed with feminine 
nouns, we have Shesh, which displays its intimate relationship with 
the Egyptian ses. In the above table it will be seen that the least 
variety exists in the case of number seven. This seems to me to be 
accounted for probably in this way. This was the sacred number 
among the Semitic and Egyptian races, and would be likely, there- 
fore, to undergo less change than the others. The form that embodied 
their religious ideas would soon come to be regarded as sacred as the 
