PHCENICIA
161
PHCENICIA
such translation. 2. That it is contrary to the analogy of the ordinary Hebrew practice in other cases: as, for example, in reference to the names of the Assyrian monarchs (perhaps of a foreign dynasty) Pul, Tiglath- Pileser, Sennacherib, or of the Persian monarchs Darius, Ahasuerus, Artaxerxes, which remain unintelligible in Hebrew, and can only be understood through other Ori- ental languages. 3. That there is an absolute silence in the Bible as to there having been any difference what- ever in language between the. Israelites and the Ca- naanites, although in other cases where a difference existed that difference is somewhere alluded to, as in the case of the Egyptians (Psa. Ixxxi, 5; cxiv, 1), the Assyrians (Isa. xxxvi, 11), and the Chaldees (Jer. v, 15), Yet in the case of the Canaanites there was stronger reason for alluding to it; and without some allusion to it, if it had existed, the narration of the conquest of Canaan under the leadership of Joshua would have been singularly imperfect.
The Phoenician language, however, certainly be- longed to that family of languages which, by a name not altogether free from objection, but now generally adopted, is called "Shemitic." Under this name are included three distinct branches : a. Arabic, t$ which belongs iEthiopic as an offshoot of the Southern Arabic or Himvaritie. b. Aramaic, the vernacular language of Palestine at the time of Christ, in which the few original words of Christ which have been preserved in writing appear to have been spoken (Matt, xxvii, 40 ; Mark v, 41; and mark especially Matt. xvi. 18, which is not fully significant either in Greek or Hebrew). Aramaic, as used in Christian literature, is called Syriac, and as used in the writings of the Jews has been very generally called Chaldee. c. Hebrew, in which by far the greater part of the Old Testament was composed. Now one of the most interesting points to the Biblical student connected with Phoenician, is, that it does not belong to either of the first two branches, but to the third; and that it is in fact so closely allied to Hebrew that Phoenician and Hebrew, though different dialects, may practically be regarded as the same language. This may be shown in the following way: (1.) In pas- sages which have been frequently quoted (see especially Gesenii Monumenta Scriptures Lingucecpu Pkaemcice, p. 231), testimony is borne to the kinship of the two lan- guages by Augustine and Jerome, in whose time Phoe- nician or Carthaginian was still a living language. Jerome, who was a good Hebrew scholar, after men- tioning, in his Commentaries on Jeremiah (lib. v, c. 25) that Carthage was a Phoenician colony, proceeds to state, "Unde et Pceni sermone corrupto quasi Phoeni appellantur, quorum lingua Hebra?a; lingua; magna ex parte confinis est." Augustine, who was a native of Africa, and a bishop there of Hippo, a Tyrian colony, has left on record a similar statement several times. In one passage he says of the two languages, "Ista; lingua; non multum inter se differunt" (Qucesliunes in Ilepta- teuchum, vii, 16). In another passage he says. "Cog- natse sunt ista; lingiue et vicinse, Hebraea, et Punica, et Syra" (In Joann. Tract. 15). Again, on Gen. xviii, 9, he says of a certain mode of speaking (Gen. viii, 9), "Locutio est, quarn propterea Hebraam puto, quia et Punica; lingua; familiarissima est. in qua mult a inveni- mus Hebraeis verbis consonantia" (lib. i, cap. 24). On another occasion, remarking on the word Messias, he says, "Quod verbum Punica; linguae consonum est, sicvt iilin Hebrcea multa et pane omnia' {Contra literas Peti- liani, ii, c. 104). (2.) These statements are fully con- firmed by a passage of Carthaginian preserved in the Pcmulus of Plautus (act v, scene 1), and accompanied by a Latin translation as part of the play. There is no doubt that the Carthaginians and the Phcenicians were the same race; and the Carthaginian extract is undeni- ably intelligible through Hebrew to Hebrew scholars (see Bochart's Canaan; and especially (Jcstnii Monu- menta Plmniriee, p. 357-382, where the passage is trans- lated with notes, and fidl justice is done to the previous YIII.-L
translation of Bochart). (3.) The close kinship of the two languages is, moreover, strikingly confirmed by very many Phoenician and Carthaginian names of places and persons, which, destitute of meaning in Greek and Latin, through which languages they have become widely known, and having sometimes in those lan- guages occasioned false etymologies, become really sig- nificant in Hebrew. Thus through Hebrew it is known that Tyre, as Tsar, signifies " a rock," referring doubt- less to the rocky island on which the city was situated : that Sidon, as Tsidon, means "Fishing" or "Fishery," which was probably the occupation of its first settlers: that Carthage, or, as it was originally called. " Cartha- da," means "New Towmi," or "Newton:" and that Byr- sa, which, as a Greek name, suggested the mythological mythus of the Bull's Hide (JEneid, i. 36(£ 367), was simply the citadel of Carthage — "Carthaginis arcem," as Virgil accurately termed it: the Carthaginian name of it, softened by the Greeks into Bvpaa, being merely the Hebrew word Botsrah, "citadel;" identical with the word called Bozrah in the English Version of Isa. lxiii, 1. Again, through Hebrew, the names of celebrated Carthaginians, though sometimes disfigured by Greek and Roman writers, acquire a meaning. Thus Dido is found to belong to the same root as David, ••beloved;" meaning "his love" or "delight;" i. e. the love or de- light either of Baal or of her husband: Hasdrubal is the man "whose help Baal is:" Hamilcar the man whom the god •• Jlilcar graciously granted" (comp. Ha- naneel; 66o6*wpo£) : and, with the substitution of Baal for El or God. the name of the renowned Hannibal is found to be identical in form and meaning with the name of Hanniel, who is mentioned in Numb, xxxiv, 23 as the prince of the tribe of Manasseh : Hanniel meaning the grace of God, and Hannibal the grace of Baal. (4.) The same conclusion arises from the exami- nation of Phoenician inscriptions, preserved to the pres- ent day; all of which can be interpreted, with more or less certainty, through Hebrew. Some of these will be more particularly noticed below.