Without pretending to trace up these Babylonians to their original ethnic source, these are certainly strong reasons for supposing them to have passed from Ethiopia to the valley of the Euphrates shortly before the opening of the historic period :—1. The system of writing which they brought with them has the closest affinity with that of Egypt—in many cases indeed, there is an absolute identity between the two alphabets. 2. In the Biblical genealogies, Cush (Ethiopia) and Mizraim (Egypt) are brothers, while from the former sprang Nimrod (Babylonia). 3. In regard to the language of the primitive Babylonians, the vocabulary is undoubtedly Cushite or Ethiopian, belonging to that stock of tongues which in the sequel were everywhere more or less mixed up with the Semitic languages, but of which we have probably the purest modern specimens in the Mahra of Southern Arabia and the Galla of Abyssinia. 4. All the Traditions of Babylonia and Assyria point to a connection in very early times between Ethiopia, Southern Arabia and the cities on the lower Euphrates. 5. In further proof of the connection between Ethiopia and Chaldea, we must remember the Greek tradition both of Cepheus and Memnon, which sometimes applied to africa, and sometimes to the countries at the mouth of the Euphrates; and we must also consider the geographical names of Cush and Phut, which, although of African origin, are applied to races bordering on Chaldea, both in the Bible and the inscriptions of Darius. (Essay VI. Appendix,Book-I, HISTORY OF HERODOTUS, translated by Professor George Rawlinson, with essays and notes by Sir Henry Rawlinsonand Sir. J. G. Wilkinson.)
Posted on: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 20:14:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015