OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. 53 



namely, maternal uncle and son of maternal uncle; maternal aunt and son of 

 maternal aunt. This fragment is all that remains of the Hebrew system as it is 

 shown in the table. The nature, and to some extent the form, of the system may 

 be gathered from the Scripture genealogies, in which it is found to be descriptive. 



So far as the characteristic features of the Hebrew form of consanguinity are 

 given in the Table, they are seen to be identical with the Arabic substantially. 

 This fact becomes important when it is remembered that the Hebrew system is 

 shown as it existed when the language ceased to be spoken, which event is gene- 

 rally placed at the period of the Babylonian captivity 720 B. C. At the commence- 

 ment of the Christian era the Aramaic dialect of the Semitic language had become 

 substituted for the Hebrew among the Jews. The slight differences between the 

 Arabic of to-day and the Hebrew form of twenty centuries and upwards ago, is a 

 fact of some significance in its bearing upon the question of the stability of the 

 radical features of descriptive systems of relationship. 



There are several points concerning the use of terms of consanguinity in the 

 New Testament Scriptures, as well as in the Old, which it would be instructive to 

 investigate. This is particularly the case with reference to the term for brother, 

 which appears to have been applied to a cousin as well, and which use finds 

 its parallel in the Turanian form. But with the radical features of the Hebrew 

 system before us, these uses of the term must either find their explanation in some 

 particular custom ; or point to a different and still more primitive form. 



III. Aramaic Branch. Neo-Syriac, or Nestorian. 



The Syriac and Chaldee are the two principal dialects of the Aramaic branch of 

 the Semitic language. Of these, the Nestorian is the modern form of the Syriac, 

 and stands to it in the same relation Italian does to Latin. It is a lineal descend- 

 ant of the ancient language of Babylon and Nineveh. We are indebted to the 

 American missionaries for rendering the dialect accessible. 



The Nestorian nomenclature of relationships has been developed slightly beyond 

 the Arabic and the Hebrew. It has original terms for grandfather and grand- 

 mother, by means of which, and in combination with the terms for father and 

 mother, ascendants are described in the same manner as in the Arabic ; also, origi- 

 nal terms for grandson and granddaughter, and for the next degree beyond, by 

 means of which descendants are distinguished from each other. This is the extent 

 of the difference, but it introduces a slight variation in the method of describing 

 kindred. 



The first collateral line, male, gives the following series : Brother, son of 

 brother, grandson of brother, and great grandson of brother. The form is the 

 same as in the Arabic, but with the substitution of the new terms. In the second 

 collateral we have paternal uncle, son of paternal uncle, and grandson of paternal 

 uncle ; and in the third, brottier of grandfather, son of brotfier of grandfather, 

 and grandson of brother of grandfather. The remaining branches of these lines 

 are described, with corresponding changes, in the same manner. 



In the Nestorian there are no terms for nephew or niece or cousin, consequently 

 dmuwee and umte, KMluwee and Kdhleh, uncle and aunt, and which are from the 



