speaking dialects of a tongue long familiar to B&rberic ears through anterior Punic
intercourse : -^the Arabs, I repeat, cognate with the Berbers in nomadic restlessness
and social habits, have ridden over the Goetulians, through them, and around them :
but whilst from the first hour, a . d . 644, that the lances of IsIàm penetrated into Ber-
berta, the wise policy of its Arabian votaries associated the native Berbers in spoils and
benefits mutually agreeable ; the Arab himself, after twelve centuries of Barbaresque
sojourn, has become far more Berberized as a MOGHRABEE than the Berbers have
been Arabicized. And (asks the reader) what is the j ultima ratio ” of all these successive
influences upon mankind’s Atlantic type ?
Merely this : — that wherever the Gcetulian has not (he has in Morocco) revindicated
his national supremacy, he rather tolerates Arab encampments in the domains of his
birth-right, than hospitably welcomes Arabian presence by practical fusion. “ Mohammed”
is their moral bond of Barbaresque unity — their common battle-cry.
Implacable detestation of Turks and Frenchmen is the only chord of sympathy between
Abd-el-Kàder (slave of the Puissant), the heroic and betrayed Shemite, and that mulatto-
cross between Arabico-Berbers and Negresses, exhibited in a beastly individuality
called “ the Emperor of Morocco.” Hatred to aliens — to anybody but one of themselves,
a Berber— is still the banner of Gcetulian instincts.
If, then, Gætulian populations cannot have originated through imaginary importations
of Negroes from the interior of Africa, nor from imaginary colonizations of white
races from Europe, whence came they ?
History being impartially silent, our alternative lies between Arabian immigrations
as one possibility, and the autocthonous creation of Berbers for Barbary as the other.
My own inquiries lend no support to the scientific probabilities of the former contingency.
The latter it is not my province to discuss®- G. R. G.]
Viewing, therefore, Gcetulian families as “ une race apart,” we proceed to ascertain
their relation to the chart of Xth Genesis.
Their present name is Berbers in Mauritania, and Shillouhs towards the Cyrenaica.
In Ebn Khaledoon’s “ History of the Berbers,” we have already noticed that one
tribe of this race was called LAOTJTE, or L a o u t e h . Cutting off the Arabic plural
termination, there remains LAOIJT ; which, reduced to its simplest expression, vowels
being vague, is LUT, or LUD ; an appellative, as we have shown, traceable in Barbaresque
nomenclatures at all times, back to where history is lost.
In Xth Genesis, the eldest-born of the affiliations of the MTsRiwz (or Egyptians),
and who, therefore, in the idea of the writer, issued first and went furthest from the
supposed parental hive, are the LUDIM. Removing the Hebrew plural suffix IM,
there remains LUD. All commentators unite in deeming Barbary the geographical
sphere of these emigrations.
To have shown that the Laouteh, LUDs, of Ebn Khaledoon, can be no others than
the Ludim, LUDs, of Xth Genesis, is likewise to prove that Gcetulian families are
included in that ancient system of geography, and that the LUDIM probably occupied
Mauritania. A conclusion which our inquiries into the habitats of their fraternal
affiliations will fortify. In the meanwhile, we rejoice to learn from Grâberg de Hemso
that the Ludaya tribe still furnishes the Sultan’s .body-guard in Morocco, and that
their river Tagassa is yet called Laud and Thaluda; at the same time that it is satisfactory
to find such scholarship as Quatremère’s sustaining how, “ Dans les Loudes de
Moïse, je reconnais la grande nation des Lewata, la plus puissante des tribus de race
Berbère ;” and thus ratifying our views upon the LUDiw of Xth Genesis.611
— AraNTVTTM — ‘ A n am im .’
Of course,, this is a tribe which (plural termination IM cut off ) was called ASNM.
Viewed as Aânams the analogies falter, unless we adopt Bochart’s speculative idea,
that the Semitic word for sheep, GNM, be the root of this name. The iVwm-idians,
Nomades, have also furnished comparisons; which we dispute not, because it is in
Barbary»that commentators locate the people called ANMim.
Referring the reader to the “ causes of verbal obscurity” in Oriental names, ably
set forth by Forster and De Saulcy, there are few literal permutations more frequent
than those of M and N : and hence it has been long remarked, that ANM is but an
anagrammatic form of AMN. Under such view, the AMN-fcm become at once Amo-
nians; and, from the ancient worshippers of the Egyptian deity AMN-Kneph, or
NUM, at the “ Oasis of Ammon” (now Seewah\; through the Nasamonitis, Nasamones;
to the Amonians, or the Garamantes, whether on the river Cinyphus near Tripoli, or
on the Gir ; the transition is more rapid than the results may appear precise.
Castiglione gives solid reasons why the Macce-Ammonii, or Macce-Amnii, should refer
to Amazirgh-Ammonians; which term he supposes became in Greek mouths Mes-
ammones, and thence Nas-ammones. Hence, the ANMim would naturally take their
places among Berber tribes next to the LUDs, their kinsfolk.
The Nasamones of Herodotus and of later writers, read by Birch AfaAsw-Amonians
(Aeyro-Amonians?), were a very roving predatory race; who carried their name all
over Barbary: but, without insisting upon any one family in whose name AMN is a
component, it is for objectors, after perusing what follows, to show that the Barbaresque
Anamim of Xth Genesis, cannot be represented by some offshoot of the Gcetulian
stem yet, stretching between the Sahara and the Mediterranean.
For ourselves, while descrying the Anamim in the Berber tribe of “ Enine,” catalogued
by Ebn Khaledoqn, we suggest that AaNM may underlie both the words “ Nasamones
” and “ Numidians; ” and this for a reason that no Orientalist acquainted with
hieroglyphical permutations will disregard. Bunsen, following Ewald, proposed to
read the name GUB, Chub [which nation Ezekiel (xxx. 5) associates with “ KUSA, and
Phut (Barbary) and Ludim (the Ludayas, as shown above, No. 27) and all the mingled
people,”] as if such name had been written gNUB ; and thence to apply it to Nubia — a
country, we have proved, altogether unmentioned by Hebrew writers. Volney had
perceived GUB in the Barbaresque Cobbii of Ptolemy, and we adopt his view as by far
more natural, according to the context of Ezekiel. Nevertheless, Bunsen’s very just
remark of the frequent suppression of the n before g or k, in the transfer of Hamitic
into Semitic proper names {ex. gr., S h e s h o n k , Shishak), allows us to behold the «NuM
of AaNM-IM in the GNUM-zcfoms of classical history. If, however, with Bochart, we ,
transcribe the Greek Naaanoves into Hebrew letters, | ’BO ; NaSI AM-N, or otherwise
N&SI-ANuM-Swi; we observe that Nets means “ people” in Semitish tongues, and
thereby such compound name becomes, in English, “ People of NUMzVft'a; ” or else,
“ People of (the oasis of) AM o N i n either case, the Anamim of Xth Genesis.
But Bochart declared that these tribes were “ Solinus’s Amantes, and Pliny’s Ham-
manientes, peoples beyond the Greater Syrt i sand, reminding us that “l J, GaR,(means
“ to inhabit,” he discloses at once the famed “ Garamantes near to the fountains of the
river Cyniphus.” Now, let us add that this river is still called the Gir, or Gar, by
living descendants of these very Amantes, who once were the Berber ASMaN-IM
alluded to by the ancient Hebrew geographer.612
29. D ’3 i l S — T.TTBTTVT — ‘ L eh a b im .’
The first orthodox English work we chanced to open, in quest of etymological meanings,
has, “ L e h a b im , flames; or, which are inflamed; or, the points of a sword!” and
just below, “ L i b y a , in Hebrew Lubim, the heart of the sea; or, a nation that has a
heart / ”
Let us seek elsewhere. Detaching the plural IM, through which the writer of Xth
Genesis indicates that he means a- tribe, the singular number of whom is LHB, we
realize instantaneously how ignorant of Hebrew were the forty-seven translators of
King James’s version. This may be at once seen by their writing “ Mizraim begat
Ludim, and Anamim,” &c., instead of ‘‘ the Luds and the Anams” and so forth. Had