Semitish tongues, you will recognize in the “ Shaw&m,” people of
Shftm, or Syria (SAeMites),— as the Arabs still designate tlje Damascenes
technically, and the Syrians generally — the very men whose
ancestral images were chiselled by Diospolitan artists not less than
3200 years agone.
F ig . 101.1® F ig . 102.183
F ig. 103.im F ig. 104.185
F ig. 106.188 F ig. 106.187
Here let us pause. Thirty varieties, more or less, of the Caucasian type,
solely among ancient foreigners to Egypt, have now been submitted
to the reader. They have been taken, almost at random, from the
Monumenti of Rosellini, with occasional reference to the Penkmaler
of Lepsius: and their epochas range between the thirteenth and the
seventeenth centuries b. c .; a period of about 400 years, including,
moreover, whatever era is assignable to Moses. There is diversity
enough among them to satisfy the most exacting, that men, in the
same times and countries, were jjist as distinctly marked as they are
now in the Levant, after some 3300 years; and hence, again, it follows
that, in the same lands, time has produced no change, save through
amalgamation; because, in the streets of Cairo, Jerusalem, Damascus,
Beyroot, Aleppo, Antioch, Mosul, and Bagdad, every one of these
varieties strikes your vision daily.
Mark, too, that the whole of these diversified Oriental families occupied
a very limited geographical area; viz.: from the river Mile eastward
to the Tauric range of mountains; at most, to the western
borders of the Euxine and Caspian Seas, and across from the Mediterranean
to the Persian Gulf—the Indus, perhaps, inclusive. This
superficies constitutes but a petty segment of the earth. Neither have
we yet looked beyond such narrow horizon, whether for Mongols, Malays,
Polynesians, Australians, Americans, Esquimaux; nor for Finnish,
Scandinavian, endless European, TTralian, and other races, with the
above types necessarily coexistent, although to old Pharaonic ethnography
utterly unknown! Observe likewise, that, Egypt deducted,
Africa and her multifarious types are yet untouched.
How, we feel now emboldened to ask, have the defenders of the
ITmiy-doctrine * e t the above facts ? The answer is simple. By suppressing
every one of them.
Dr. Prichard published the third edition of the Hd volume of his
Researches into the Physical History of Mankind, in 1837, at the vast metropolis
of London, surrounded with facilities unparalleled. He devotes
fifty-nine pages to the “ E g y p tia n s 188 yet, beyond a passing
sneer at Champollion-le-Jeune,189 whose stupendous labors were then
endorsed by the highest continental scholars — De Sacy, Humboldt,
Arago, Bunsen, &c. —he never quotes a single hierologist! Now-a-
days, every archaeologist knows that three-fourths of those very writers
whom Prichard does cite on Egypt have been consigned to the “ tomb
of the Capulets.” Now, in 1837, Rosellini’s Plates and Text, comprehending
almost every pictorial fact by us brought forward, had been
published-—in great part, for above four years, commencing in 1832—3.
Common enough was the Tuscan work in London, to say naught of
Paris, close at hand. How could Prichard ignore the existence also
22