
 
        
         
		m m m wSSBssm 
 I f 
 l i 
 11 1m1l . 
 364. NQTBS  AND  ILLtFSTRATI#®» 
 have little  extent:  the teeth  are  set  vertically.  It is  remarked hf1  
 ]\4.  Dubreuil that in two Guanche  mummies the coronoid apophysis  
 of the lower jaw is mote distant from the condyle ,than  in  European  
 heads-  This character  exists'in the Guanche mummy preserved in  
 the Museum of Parisr.£  It appears,  according to M.  Flp_ur^||| in  a  
 still greater-deg^e in the lower yaw of an Egyptian mummy. 
 M.  Dubreuil added some observations on a perforation of the humerus  
 observed  in  the  skeletons of two  Guanches,  similar to that  
 remarked by M. Cuvier in the female of the Bushman race.  To this  
 subject I have already adverted when describing the anatOpaipal  peculiarities  
 of the Hottentots. 
 N ote  IV. 
 On  the  Vocabularies at  the end o f  Chapter IL in pages 41, 42: 
 The  following  remarks  on thn  comparative  vocphglaries of. the  
 Berber and other Atlantic dialects with those Of tiielnarthefn -African  
 and southern European idioms," will tend to illus,t^fer'the e%miolQgy  
 of many words in the several columns,  and the relations )|Mhe;,4iiif-‘  
 ferent dialects to eaeh other.  I am indebted for- them5to.Mr. W.„ M  
 Newman,  whose analyst of the Berber translation of; St.  Luke and  
 Berber  Grammar  have been  repeatedly mentioned in  the^eeedmg  
 pages. 
 L  Remarks on the column of Berber words. 
 1.  In  the  Berber  column,  the  word  elekoup^xeadexed raintjik.  
 seems  to  mean  storm  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  and  to  be the  
 Arabic  el-hawa,  the  air  or  wind.  -  Face—mjtadottm—-should  be  
 madam oxodom,  the particle ag being only a preposition.  Womap  
 ^themmetorot—seems  to be a  misprint  for  themmetowt  ^  ^ be  
 correctly said that TH initial  is the Berber femininearticle, the word  
 is' mattut,  pointing to the root, mat ox mad, whence comes the Berber  
 word maddan, men.  Boy—agehich—is a misprint for aqchich—  
 AQCHICH.  Call—kerar—ox rather qara,  is pure Hebrew,  and  is  
 used in Berber in aU its Hebrew senses.  In Arabic it has  a different  
 sense  to  read.  Good, deTali;  the d is a prefix:  the root is eVa-li,  
 good, if indeed the,«/ be not the Arabic article.  The word  tefoukt,  
 which stands for sun,  is used  once in the Berber Gospel of St. Luke  
 for fire, while tkafath is used for light and for the oven.  Comparing  
 the Showiah  column,  we  can hardly doubt  that  fouk  is  the root,  
 penning ablaze, flame, light,’or source of heat;  afire-place—having 
 a remarkable similarity.,to the  Latin|y&>eros-,'  Italian fuoco—whence  
 the'.femininesfdrhi  tèfon%fat corruptly tefout.  But the element of fire  
 is  t h im i f i S t p , I are^expiessfed'by  tint,.the Arabic fora fig. 
 ^Comparing  thé  w ;firfet  Columns,  the  Shillali  is evidently 
 ^^■■^Comparirig Showiah  with..Berber,  we  may remark;  Sky,  or  
 hpaven'7  in> Berber,  is  thagnarv—probably akin to signa, a cloud—  
 though, omitted’  in the  table: pl^aT.s^i^ö^'ïr'Points  to, the  root  
 ithra, since; to final is a Berber plural;  ;also,gethra,  yethra,  would  
 be a mere provincial1 variati owj'fKfLfi-1 and alfil, the same :  thitoani  
 has the form of  an Arabic • plural,' 'from  singular  thini.  A ifk i— 
 milk—is  evidently a  corruption  of  alefki1 so- that  neatly all the  
 Showiah nouns^are at  once; „-referable to .'Berber.  The word fotise>  
 head, one maysuspeetito.be amistake: 
 The verbs are  less similar*'but when  at language  is  but  slightly  
 known, it is hard to  obtain the  verbs  sl|jaccurately as  to  found a  
 neg^tive^argument.  We .have.-here  but six - verbs to  compare,  of  
 which-certainly two':—to-eat and -to  sit—are the same,  and .probably  
 a; third—-to -speak—-so that  it  would be futile to reason  from them.  
 The evidence before us seems,  therefore*-to indicate thé Showiah to  
 be only a dialect of Berber. 
 7  4. Inthe Tuaryk column,1 afiew words are Arabic, viz. »roar—a man,  
 —zaih—good,—?-yekomma—hot.  Also aghemar,  akhmar—ct, horse  
 •—is probably the same word  as Arabic  hhamar—an  asS :-—teele—  
 a sheep^may be compared with the Arabic  tali—a lamb,  unless it  
 is the same word  as the. Showiah  only,  with  the.article t prefixed.  
 Laghrum—a camel-^is doubtless the same as elghoum, under.a different  
 system of orthography.  Head, in Berber,  is ik h f;  in Tuaryk,  
 ighrof.  If yhr here,  as elsewhere,  denotes, the  Arabic  the 
 word  is  better  written ig h o f  identical with ikhf.  We may however  
 remark,  that  in  the -Gospel of  St.  Luke  the Berber word for  
 head is aqarroy,  [in  Langlee,  ik h f  and  aqamvi.]  Khool,  which  
 stands in the  Tuaryk  column  for  fish*,.in  Arabic  means vinegar  
 possibly its strict  application in Tuaryk may  be  to pickled fish.  If  
 these remarks hold, nearly all the remaining Tuaryk is Berber. 
 5.  In the Siwah column, the words samak—fish,—saint—year,—  
 are Arabic,  and probably aMwmr, as was observed.  Of the rest it  
 is easy to  count  thirteen that are  Berber,  and eighteen which may,  
 indeed,  be Berber,  but which are not. manifested to be such by the  
 table.  In  the Tuaryk column I can  only count five for the eighteen  
 in the Siwah.  Hence the evidence of the table.seems to be that the  
 Siwah is less near to the Berber than is the Tuaryk.