LANGUAGES OF THE INDO-EUROPEAN FAMILY. 285 



ber of common roots outside of those wliicli they have borrowed from 

 one another in historic times."® It is on the ground of many radical 

 words being the common property of the two families of language 

 that many philologists, whose opinions Renan combats, have main- 

 tained their primeval imity. Some instances taken almost at random 

 from the Hebrew lexicon, will suffice to show this identity of root in 

 the Semitic and Aryan tongues : 



Heh., HAKHAH or CHAKHAH; Eng., hook; Ger., haken; Dutch, haak; 



Dan., hage. 

 Eeb., HANAK or CHANAK; Eng., hang; Ger., henken ; Dutch, hangen ; 



Dan., hoenge. 

 ^e6., YALAL; ^j^gr., wail, howl, yell; Gr., o\o\\xzb; Lat., vAwlo. 

 Heb., KHAPHAR; Eng., cover; Slavon, kover;? French and Romance, couvrir, ckc. 

 Heb., LAPID ; Eng., lamp ; Gr., lampas-ados. 

 ^e6., LAKAT; Eng., collect; Lat, lectum. 



J?eS., LAKAK; -E'n^'., lick ; ffr., leicho; ia<., lingo; Ger., lecken. 

 iZeS., AGABAH; ^n^'., love; (rr., agape. 



Eeb., ATZAD or GATZ AD ; Eng., adze, axe ; Gr., axine ; Dan., oexe ; Ger,, axt. 

 Heb., FARAD; Eng., part, separate ; Lat, pars-tis. 

 Heb., KOL; Eng., voice, call; Gr., kaleo; Sans., kal. 

 Heb., KEREN; Eng., horn; Lat., cornu ; Gaelic, corn. 

 Heb., TZIPPOR; Eng., sparrow; Goth., sparwa; Ger,, Sperling. 

 Heb., SHAKAPH; Eng., look, see, scope; Gr., skopeo. 

 Heb,, SHARAK; Eng., whistle; Gr., surigx;? Eng., shriek. 



The mere casual survey of a lexicon of any of the Semitic tongues, 

 Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac or Arabic, must convince the unprejudiced 

 student in philology how unjustifiable is the broad line of demarca- 

 tion drawn between them and languages of the Indo-European stock. 



Dr. Hyde Clarke, in a letter to the Athendeiom of the 23rd of Sep- 

 tember last, cites a large nvimber of Hebrew geographical names, with 

 their phonetic equivalents in Greek and Latin. He says in conclu- 

 sion, '*I may state what I now know to be the fact, that the language 

 of these names is Caucasian." Two statements of Sir Henry Raw- 

 linson, in his essay on the Early History of Babylonia, merit atten- 

 tion in this connection. "There was not, perhaps, in the very earliest 

 ages, that essential linguistic difference between Hamite and Semitic 

 nations which would enable an enquirer at the present day, from a 

 mere examination of their monumental records, to determine posi- 



• Histoire Generale et Systeme Compare des Langues Semitiques, par Ernest Reuan, vide 

 article of Rev. William Taylor, British and Foreign Evangelical Review. The position of the 

 Shemitic nations in the History of Civilization, English translation, together with An Essay on 

 the Age and Antiquity of the Book of Nabathjean Agriculture. London, 1862. Triibner, p. 116. 



2 



