Fundi i Enigmes pellazge-etruske

[Kreksi]

Armenian tani, "fert, reddit, tenet." Ten-in-e would be a form like ker-in-u, just noticed, but in an e, not a u conjugation. The simpler form is tenu (ante, p. 36, note f). Compare the Armenian psnov, = psne, = psi, "he considers."
[graphic]

Alpan (9, 10), "supplex, t/cerij?, flehend." Armenian otb, "fletus:" -an, -ean, Armenian adjectival terminations. The letters o and b are wanting in Etruscan.

Teke (11), "facit," or else "ponit."

Lapponic takk-et, Fin tek-a, "facere.'' Sanskrit taks,

"facere, fabricare, findere •" taksan, " faber lignarius."

Armenian thak, "a hammer, a mallet;" thak-el, "to

beat, to ram." Latin tignum, tigillum. Greek TeKrwv,

rexVV

Te-ke might also be regarded as an Etruscan verb in -ke from a root t- "placing." This Aryan root is in Armenian d-, and de-ni is "ponit," an n form like the Etruscan ten-ine and ker-inu.

Thup-lthas (9) ) „ • . , ,,

Thuf-Uhas (10) J s,^num Precis'an ex voto

Ti/7ro? \m)?. Armenian tophel, thopel, dophel,

"TVTTTeiv" atothel, "precari;" itz, "desiderium •"

etzal, " desiderare." Though the Armenian avoids t as an initial, yet we find tzali, as well as etzali, "desiderandus." Tu7ro? illustrates teke by exhibiting the connexion between "striking," and "forming" or "making." As Tutto? and 'klttj are not Latin (for typus is borrowed), they would be Thracian rather than Hellenic words, if the Hellenes were an offshoot of the same Italian race to which the Umbrians and Oscans belonged.

Lenache (10), "facessit."

Armenian etanake, "niodulatur;" etanak, "modus, forma;" etanil "fieri;" Uriel, " esse, fieri, existere." There is, besides, the suffix -etin, "fac(tus)," as in osketin, "made of gold (oskij".* In Armenian, the termination - ak is frequently causative, like the Sanskrit -aka: e.g. e, "existence;" eak, "creator;" so that, as lin-el is "fieri," Un-aki would be " fieri facit." If lenache be " facessit," teke would be " ponit" rather than "facit."

Chiseliks (11), "monumentum, in memoriam."

Armenian yiselich, "a memorial," the plural form of yiseli, of which the diminutive would be yiselik (a form like the Etruscan suihik), and its plural form yiselikch, in the objective yiseliks. Yiseli is the future participle of yisel, "to remember," of which the root is yis. Similar forms to yiselich are:—talich, "gift," Iselich, "ear, audience," empelich, "beverage," and tesanelich, "sight, eyes" {ante, p. 86). But the existing Armenian forms derived from the root khat, "playing," will most clearly exemplify the supposed formation of chiseliks from a root chis.

ARMENIAN. ETRUSCAN.

khat, "ludus." chis

khatal, "ludere."

khatali, "ludendus."

khatallch, "ludus," i.e. "ludenda."

khatalik, "ludus" (dimin.)

khataliks, "ludos." chiseliks

For the affinity between the Etruscan chis and the
Armenian yis, compare the Armenian khovzel, yovzel,

[Kreksi]

THE INSCRIPTION OF CERVETRI.

In the two previous chapters, which have been devoted to the consideration of sepulchral and votive forms in Etruscan, the force of the argument is in a great measure derived from the fact, that the Armenian language enables us to explain the Etruscan words in such a manner as to make the sense of the Etruscan forms correspond closely to that of other ancient forms of the same kinds. The meaning assigned to the Etruscan words may sometimes be described as certain, as in the cases of avil, ril, and Icine, and may be generally affirmed as more or less probable in every case; so that the argument in favour of the Armenian or Thracian affinities of the Etruscan becomes very strong. In the subject of the present chapter, there are no such analogies to guide us: there is no sense which we are bound to elicit from the Etruscan by the aid of the Armenian, if the intimate relationship between the two languages is to be maintained. That the inscription of Cervetri is Armenian, depends chiefly upon the singular closeness with which the Armenian fits it, and which is such that even the metre of the inscription, for it is written in verse, scarcely suffers at all, while a good and appropriate sense is brought out for it at the same time.

The Inscription of Cervetri, the ancient Agylla or Care, is written on a pot or cup of antique black ware, capable of holding nearly a pint; and it consists of two hexameter verses, but with the words all run together. They should probably be divided thus:—

mi ni Itethu ma mi mathu mar am lisiai thipurenai

ethe erai sie epana mi nethu nastav helephu.

As it might be objected that the lines are divided into words so as to adapt them to the Armenian, it may be as well to mention that my division of them is the same as that of Lepsius, with the exception that he reads mar am instead of mar am in the first line, and minethu instead of mi nethu in the second, where I follow Dr. Donaldson. Maram may perhaps be preferable to 'mar am, as will ultimately appear: but, if we read mi ni kethu and mi mathu with Lepsius, then mi nethu seems more probable than minethu. As we have already met with mi, "I," in Etruscan, it may reasonably be conjectured that the cup is made to speak of itself, and that it affirms of mathu what it denies of kethu. Again, as the Etruscan is an Aryan language, it will be at once suspected that mathu means "wine," for such a word occurs in a great number of Aryan dialects, from the English mead to the Sanskrit madhu.

With this slight clue to the tenor of the inscription, I will now proceed to interpret it word for word, as I have divided it:—
[ocr errors]

1. Mi, "I."

The Armenian for "I" is es; for "me," (z)is: but me, "I," and me, "me," exist implicitly in the Armenian plurals, mech, "we" (= Lithuanian mis), and (z)mez, "us." For dov, "thou," makes dovch, "ye"; and the Armenian nominative plural is formed by the addition of -ch to the singular, and the accusative plural by that of -s.

Welsh and Gaelic mi, "I"; Georgian me, "I": etc.

2. Ni, "not."

Armeniau mi = Greek firj = Latin ne. Welsh and Gaelic ni, "not." Behistuu Persian niya, "not." Persian mah, nah, " not."

3. Kathu, "of water"; less probably, "of milk." The Armenian get, "river," kath, "drop," kith,

"milking," and kathn, "milk," are thus declined :

[Kreksi]

Similar forms are presented by sosaphel, "to touch," kachavel, "to dance," and sovthaphel, "to hasten": so that hetaphov, as well as hetov, " he empties," might exist in an Armenian dialect.

Helephu is the last word in the Inscription of Cervetri. If all the Armenian words cited to explain this inscription be now collected together, and written in Etruscan letters, we should obtain in grammatical syntax, though the idiom might not be perfectly correct, the following Armenian couplet:— Goethe's line on the drinking-cup of the King of Thule: Mr leert' ihn jeden Schmaus. Some unimportant modifications might be suggested in the interpretation of the inscription. Thus lisiai thipurenai might be made a locative, "on (his) thirsty tongue," and connected with the second verse instead of the first. If, again, remembering that the Etruscan is several centuries older than the earliest existing Armenian, we compare the Etruscan kethu, mathu, and nethu, with the Sanskrit madhu, the Zend mathu, the Greek pedv, the Phrygian /3eSu, "water," and the Macedonian fieffv, "air" (both these last words being = Armenian vivth, "water, moisture, element, matter"), such analogies would lead us to consider the Etruscan words as nominatives or accusatives, rather than as genitives or ablatives. If they be in the accusative, then we should probably read, with Lepsius and Donaldson, maram instead of maram; and have to regard maram as a transitive verb of the second Armenian conjugation, like tarn, "I give," or ertham, "I go," and signifying "I contain," or "I dispense." Compare the Albanian marr, "I contain," and the German fass and fassen. This alteration would have the advantage of obviating one little objection: for, if the Etruscan sie signify "it be," "I am" should rather be em than am. We have, however, both am and is, wast and wert, in English, where there is a similar change of vowel. If nethu be a nominative or accusative, mi nethu would be rendered "my liquor," or "my contents," mi being equivalent to "my" or "of me," both rendered in

es mi ketu na es mathn mar em lezui tapean:
ethe erah ize ephumn, zis nithu nesteh helu.

Or, adopting such modifications as are warranted by the Armenian language itself—

me mi ketu na me mathu mar em lezui tapurini: ethe erah zie ephanay, me nithu nesteh helaphu.

This distich differs but slightly from the Inscription of Cervetri, and almost entirely preserves the metre in which it is composed. Nor can it be said that the sense which the Armenian supplies for the Etruscan is at all forced or inappropriate; but, on the contrary, that it expresses exceedingly well what so festive a nation might have inscribed on one of their drinkingcups. For the meaning of the two verses would be:—
[table][merged small]

[Kreksi]

It does not require the knowledge of many sentences, nor of a large number of words and inflexions, to enable us to pronounce upon the character of any language; so that the properties of the Etruscan have probably been sufficiently displayed in the specimens already given and analysed, which seem to include all the forms whose meaning is tolerably clear. The result is that, instead of there being no language which can claim kindred with the Etruscan, there are, on the contrary, two in Asia which may succeed in establishing a near relationship to it by explaining it to a considerable extent. The Armenian appears to do this in a very close manner, especially when it is considered that Armenia and Etruria are at opposite extremities of a long and not entirely unbroken chain of old Thracian countries, like Wallachia and Portugal among those of Latin speech. It may even be said, perhaps, that the Armenian resembles the distant Etruscan more than it does the neighbouring Phrygian, with which it was connected by the ancients. But even if the Armenian had perished with the rest of the Thracian languages, of which only a few relics survive, yet the affinities between the Sanskrit and the Etruscan would still have afforded some clue to indicate who the Etruscans were. Their language would be nearly allied to the Sanskrit, but would nevertheless belong to a different Aryan family, as the letterchanges would imply. No doubt the Sanskrit has some few advantages over the Armenian in the comparison of languages. Thus the Etruscan semph-, "seven," is nearer to the Sanskrit saptan than it is to the Zend haptan, the Persian haft, or the Armenian evthn; and the Etruscan sas, "six," is nearer to the Sanskrit sas than it is to the Armenian wez. But the Latin septem and sex are likewise nearer to the Sanskrit saptan and sas than they are to the Greek eirrd and e£; and yet the Latin and Greek are considered to belong to the same Aryan family of languages, while the Sanskrit and Latin are not so classed together. There are letter-changes which distinguish one Aryan family from another, as there are letterchanges which distinguish different members of the same family from one another. There is, besides, no letter-change in the case of the Armenian wez and the Etruscan sas, as both would be ultimately derived, along with the Albanian gyas(te) and the Persian sas, from a form like the Zend khsvas, by the omission of different letters, after the manner in which the Old Norse fimm and the Anglo-Saxon fif are deduced from the Gothic form, fimf. The argument from similarity or dissimilarity of numerals must not be pressed too far. Thus the Swedish tio and the German zehn have not one letter in common. The Gothic fidvor, too, resembles the Welsh pedwar more than the German vier: yet the Gothic was a Teutonic, not a Celtic dialect. The right conclusion would be, that the Gothic and Welsh forms are older than the German, as the Zend thri and the Etruscan thr- are older than the Armenian ere, "three." So, again, the Welsh pump and the Breton pemp are more like to the Gothic fimf than they are to the Gaelic cuig, as the Welsh pedwar and the Breton pevar are more like to the Gothic fidvor and the Anglo-Saxon fcover than they are to the Gaelic ceathair* Nor is the advantage all on the side of the Sanskrit in respect of the Etruscan numerals. Mach (with me- and muv-), "one," is Armenian, but not Sanskrit; and the Armenian hinr/, "five," leads us from the Sanskrit pancan to the Etruscan Mem or chiem.

[Kreksi]

It might be conjectured, on account of proximity, that the Etruscans were Illyrians rather than Thracians, if the Illyrians be supposed to constitute a distinct Aryan family. But, even if we set aside other arguments, and lay more stress than is allowable on numerals, there would yet be no necessity for such a conclusion, as the Albanian numerals hardly come nearer the Etruscan than the Armenian numerals do. These are the Albanian numerals from i to x: nye, dii, tri, kater, pese,* gyasftej, stafte'J, tefte'J, nenfde'J, dhye(te). The corresponding Armenian numerals are: ez (and also mi, mov, and men), erkov (not Aryan), er or ere(ch), cor(ch) or char, hing, wez (in composition wes and wath), evthn, ovth, inn (= inen), tasn.

* To get from pemp to cuig, we should pass through the Greek iremre and irirrt, the Lithuanian penki, the Armenian hing, and the Latin quinque. Greek and Oscan resemble Welsh, as Latin resembles Gaelic.

Such advantages as the Sanskrit may have over the Armenian in some few instances cannot counterbalance the weight of evidence on the other side, so as to take the Etruscans out of the Thracian family. It is not to be expected that every Thracian language should be quite like the Armenian, any more than that every Teutonic language should be quite like the English, or that every Celtic language should be quite like the Welsh, or every Neo-Latin language quite like the French. And, while the Sanskrit explains so much of the Etruscan, it almost, by that very fact, disposes of its own claims to include the Etruscans in the Indian family. Such a word as suthina, for instance, if explained by the Sanskrit hu, "Diis offerre"—and a word found singly on votive offerings is perfectly so explained—is nearly decisive by itself. Suthina would not be a Sanskrit word; while, on the other hand, the Armenian brings out suthina from hu by presenting both the right letter-change, as well as the termination, in the word zohovthivn, "sacrifice." It enables us also to form such Etruscan words as zilachnfce and thipurenai from Aryan roots, where other Aryan languages would not qualify us to construct them; and it has, in addition, the Etruscan l terminations, besides the singular Etruscan peculiarity of retaining in poetry the vowel which is discarded in prose. The Slavonian family of languages might compete with the Armenian on the ground of the letter-changes, but would fall far behind it, as well as behind the Sanskrit, in explaining Etruscan words. There is likewise a geographical improbability against the Sanskrit by reason of distance, and because Armenia fills up the gap between the Caucasian and Semitic nations.

[Kreksi]

As personal pronouns present some of the most intimate signs of affinity between different languages, I shall endeavour to detach from these agglutinate forms the personal pronouns, or pronominal affixes, which are the subjects of the auxiliary verbs. It will be found that there is more than one such affix for each person, and that the Basque pronouns, in their present state, cannot explain several of the affixes. In the forms which I shall cite, all but the subjective affixes will be enclosed in brackets, so as to leave nothing but what belongs to the pronouns implicitly found in the Basque language; and I shall begin by placing the Basque naiz, "I am," between the Georgian Var, "I am," and machus, "I have." In both languages, as will be seen, the root of "being" has a common origin with the Aryan root; and this root takes three forms in Basque, as it does in the English am, art, is, ar(e).

Georgian. Basque. Georgian.

v(ar) n(aiz) m(achus)

kh(ar) (aiz), c(era) g(achus)

(ar)s d(a) (achus, aehun)

v(ar)th gu(era) gv(aehus)

lch(ar)th c(era)te g(achus)th

[ar)ian d(ira) h(chon)ian

There is a very clear resemblance here between the Basque and the Georgian in the 2nd pers. sing, and in the ] st and 2nd pers. plur. Four other Basque conjugations are:—

n(uen) n(uque)

(uen), cend(uen) . cend{uque)

z(uen), ce(uen) l(uque)

guen(uen), gvend(uen)* guend(uque)

cen(u)t(en), cend(u)t(en) cend(uque)te

z(u)t(en), cen{uen) l(uque)te

n(ezan) n(ioteque)

cen(ezan) cen(ioteque)

c(ezan) l(ioteque)

guen(ezan) guin(ioteque)

cen(eza)te(n) cin(ioteque)

c(eza)te(n) l(ioteque)

Z-t(e), l-te, cend-te, and cen-te mark the plural of the persons z and l, "he," and cend and cen, "thou," just as we previously found in Basque, c(era), "thou art," and c(erd)te, "ye are"; and in Georgian, v(ar), "I am," and v(ar)th, "we are"; Wi(ar), "thou art," and kh(ar)th, "ye are."f In the Basque verbs cited above, the pronominal affixes were prefixed: in the verb which follows, they are post&xe

[Kreksi]

With regard to the symbols, I, v, x, "the digit/' "the hand," and "the hands" or "the fingers," I would represent accurately enough the extended finger, and v the angular space between the thumb and the forefinger when the hand is held up. This angular space is called in Armenian chil, which is like the Georgian kheli or qheli, "hand"; both which terms might contain the Etruscan or Pelasgian ki, "five," with the addition in one case of the Etruscan and Armenian termination -il, and in the other of the Georgian termination -eli. x would be the figure formed by placing the two hands across one another. The Chinese character for " ten" is a cross, which is called si, as "hand" is called seu in Chinese, and si in Suanian, and as " ten" is sva in Abkhasian.

The results of the previous analysis of numerals are to be taken in conjunction with what seems to follow from the numbers on the Etruscan dice, namely, that the Pelasgic Etruscan numerals were Caucasian. See especially the tabular view (ante, p. 54). The inferences which I should be inclined to draw from the numerals, as well as from conjugations and pronouns, have been already explained in my first chapter, where I have brought together several other coincidences of different kinds, which appear by their combined force to conduct us to a similar conclusion. And this conclusion would be:—that before the Aryans began to spread from their original home, they dwelt there with Fins and Caucasians on their west; the Caucasians tending towards the south, and the Fins towards the north: and that as the Fins scattered themselves, speaking in a general manner, over the northern half of Europe, the Caucasians did the same over the southern half, but probably at an earlier period; for the Caucasians, especially if it were allowable to include the Basques among them, cannot be said to have developed a common numeral system before dispersion, while the Fins would have done so, though not quite as perfectly as the Aryans. Both of the Turanian races would have been continually impelled farther westward, as the Dravidas would have been southward, by the expansion of the Aryans, who ultimately broke through the Western Turanians by two different routes, one on each side of the Euxine, and gradually encroached upon them till they were left as they now are, in the Caucasus, and the Pyrenees, and the North of Sweden and Russia, though their ancient presence in the heart of Europe is still indicated by two or three words used in the Alps. When Livy attributed Etruscan affinities to the Alpine population in general, but especially to the Rhaetians, he probably spoke with more accuracy than has been generally thought, or even perhaps than he himself was aware of. For all, or nearly all, the original inhabitants of the Alps (as well as of the pile-dwellings on the Swiss lakes) may have been Tuscan, i.e. Caucasian, while the Aryan Rascnas penetrated no farther to the west than Rhaetia, and a subsequent Celtic inroad made the Aryan population of Noricum quite as much Celtic

[Billy Joe]

o kreks ti paske ik per lesh lol

ti kujton se ne nuk jemi te zotet ti gjejme vete ne web keto carcafe me budallalleqe armene?!

e mbyte forumin me spam armen mer pall lol

[Kreksi]

ASIATIC AFFINITIES OF OLD ITALIANS.

Thracian. In Armenia and the Caucasus, Asia may thus claim both elements of the Etruscan people as her own, whether they were of Tyrrhenian or of Pelasgian origin. Such, at least, is the hypothesis which seems to explain all the evidence that I have brought forward, and to solve at the same time four ethnological problems. In ancient ethnology, we are led to ask, who were the Etruscans, and who were the Pelasgians? and, in modern ethnology, what has become of the two races of which the Armenians and the Caucasians are the surviving representatives? Each pair of questions supplies the answer to the other pair.

[Kreksi]

The meaningof §o\- is less easily conjectured. Thovkh signifies 'brown' in Arm., which presents no name for ground-pine. But Soxwould be better referred to the Alb. take,' earth, ground,' which is exactly the meaning required.

14. Attfiwviov. 'Pwfiaiot oviparpovfi viypovfi, ol Se rivTivvdfiov\oviu Tippai, Pa'XXot lovftfiapovfi, Aaicot Saiiiva. "A field-flower, which Pliny (xx. 8) calls beta silvestris."

(Grimm) who compares our daisy and the Germ. tag.

But in Arm., 'betarubra' \sgakndet. Subtracting det, which signifies ' medicine, herb, colour,' there remains gakn to compare with Sdttva. The word gakhin, 'a marsh,' is very probably not allied to gakn. In Rhset.-Rom., giaccun is 'plantago, waybread,' which "hath great large leaves, almost like to a beet-leaf." (Dodoens). Now giaccun, phonetically, =gakn.1

15. SvpiQ. 'PwfJLdiot yXaSioXovju, ot St ipiju ayptartft, Aaicot

In Arm., prisk is 'Thapsia, a kind of dill;' but is more nearly the Arm. aprovst, 'salus,' the literal meaning of a\Oaia or sahia. In Pers., ipdr is 'thyme.'

16. "Ayptoorie- 'Piafiaiot ypdfi.tv, ol Se amtfroXioufi, ol Si trayyotuvaXtju, of St ovvioXafi., 'ltrTravot awapia, Aokoi Kortara. This seems decidedly Arm., as khot signifies in Arm., 'herb, grass, hay, forage,' = aypoxme, = gramen. Many of the plants previously noticed are unnamed in Arm., but merely described as certain 'herbs' (khotch). The last member of KOT-lara may have defined the particular 'herb' (khot), or it may be regarded as a termination like the Arm. -avet. Cf. Arm. hot, 'perfume;' hotavet, ' odoriferous.'

The Spanish name for gramen, it appears, was awapta. May it be connected with airpovQ and KtpKtp-aijtpiliiv, and referred to the Arm. apr-il, 'to live, to escape;' apr-ovst, 'safety,