ON ETHNOLOGY. 
297 
niao and Turanian branches. We beg to call this definitively the Japhetic 
race. In many parts we know that the Turanian race has preceded the Ira¬ 
nian: its language certainly represents an anterior step or preceding degree 
of development. In some parts we found that the Turanian race succeeded 
to a still older native element. 
We now return to tlic precursor of Iranism in western Asia and iii Egypt. 
Semitism appeared to us as a one-sided progress of Chamisro. Canaan (the 
aiite-judaic iohabitaiite of Palestine and Phtenicia) is not literally a child of 
Cham, that is to say, a scion of the Egyptian stock; perhaps geographically, 
but not genealogically. But Canaan is called in Genesis the son of Cham, 
because the Canaanites, in the Ahrahainitic period, as again in the Mosaic 
lime, left lower Egypt and occupied Palestine and Tyre. Canantt came out 
of Cham; certainly the Semitic idiom is in itself a child of Cham, by being a 
development of that primitive (Asiatic) Chainism, which became fixed in the 
Egyptian. For the Egyptian language is as certainly the primitive fonna- 
tion of the Euphrates and Tigris territory, fixed in Africa and preserved by 
the Egyptians, as tha Icelandic is the old Norse fixed in that island. All this 
follows out of the facts furnished by Egyptology, if the principles above esta¬ 
blished are applied to them. 
The Semitic formation itself occupied Abyssinia; and the Berber language 
belongs evidently to the same stock. But what can we say of the rest of 
Africa? 
Here late researches liave opeueil a now and great field of the most inter¬ 
esting character. We allude in particular to the labours of Tutschek, and the 
analytical inquiries of Von Gahlenz and Ewald; but above all to tho gigan¬ 
tic and truly admirable labours of that indefatigable German Messenger of 
the Church-Missionary Society of England, the Rev. John I^ewis Krapf, whose 
compared manuscript grammar and dictionary of the Sawahili language and 
the cognate dialects of the Waiiicka ajul Wakamba tribes, with introductions 
anil numerous translations, have been entniated to me by tho enlightened 
.secretary of that Society, tJie llev. Henry Venn. These, and similar works 
about the south-eastern languages of Africa, have entirely destroyed those 
unfounded notions of an infinite number of rude and poor tongues. We now 
kuow, that dialects of the Galla language, which in the North joins the 
Abyssinian, a very fine specimen of grammatical structure and euphonic 
formation, are spoken, at lea-st os far as the fifth degree south of the equator; 
that it peuctrates deeply into the continent along the eastern coast of Africa; 
that it is joined by the noble Caffre hlioms, which also enter far into the in- 
tenor; and that the Congo idioms on the western coast, if not cognate, are 
at least very analogous in structure, as the Galla and Caffre languages are 
ilecidedly among themselves*. 
They besides all bear on tliem veatigoa of primitive aftiuity, according to 
our principles, with tlm groat tripartite stock. But if wc are asked, do these 
laiigu^es belong to C hamism, or do they stand on the degree represented by 
Semitisiu!' "'6 are obliged to answer, imlther the oim nor the other. On the 
conUary, applying to them the principles we have endeavoured to establish 
jis the general prindplcs of development, wc must confess that they stand on 
.laphfitic ground, primitive stale of Chamism, exhibiting the germ both 
of oomitism and of Japlietism, is evidently left behind in those advanced 
f* raiTtiiig these through the press (April 26.1848) 
*c rweivc the first and ycMiitJ numljer of the ' Zeitschrift der ilenfscljen tnorgenlRodischen 
Gcscilaclmft, and find in ,t Prof. Pott’s h-amed article on the languages of riie Caffre and 
Loneo tnln,*. \S e heg porUclariy to refer our readcre to the ingcoioul and acute obsena- 
11005 of Prof, bohott, brought forward ia this article. 
