129
General Forlong identifies the great building race of antiquity8 with the Kushites or Aithiopians of the Greek historians, and with Mr. Fergusson, he supposes them to have belonged to the Turanian family of peoples. The distinguished9 architect and arch?ologist affirms, indeed, that not only were the Turanians the great architects and builders of remote antiquity, but that they were the inventors of all the arts, as well as the religions and mythologies10, which were afterwards developed by the later Shemites and Aryans.
But how far does this conclusion agree with actual facts? M. Georges Perrot, in his important work on the “History of Art,” says that the ancient Oriental world has seen the birth of three great civilisations, that of Egypt, that of Chaldea, and that of China, all of which have features in common, although each preserves its own proper character. Chaldea was the Sennaar of the author of the Book of Genesis, the land in which were built the ancient cities of Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh. The mighty12 hunter or warrior13 Nimrod, to whom the erection of those cities is ascribed, was the son of Kush and the grandson of Cham, and he is thus placed by the sacred writer in the same family as the Egyptians, Aithiopians, and the Libyans, as also the Canaanites and Ph?nicians. The Kushites, of whom Nimrod is the representative in Genesis, were located by the poets and classical historians in Susiana rather than in Chaldea. Both of these countries, however, adjoin the Valley of the Tigris, and the name Aithiopians applied14 by those writers to the inhabitants of the shores of the Persian Gulf15 and the sea of Oman agrees with the relationship which, according to the130 genealogists of the Hebrew Scriptures17, subsisted18 between the Kushites of Asia and those of Africa. It is to the shores of the Persian Gulf that the development, if not the origin, of the Chaldean civilisation11 has been traced. M. Perrot calls Egypt “the ancestor of civilised nations,” and he affirms that, in grouping the great peoples of antiquity to determine the part taken by each in the work of progress, it is necessary to commence with Egypt as the point of departure of all the forces which operate to that end. The Egyptians were not, however, indigenous19 to the Valley of the Nile. It is now almost universally acknowledged that they belonged to the white or Caucasian stock of Europe and Western Asia, from which they reached Egypt by the isthmus20 of Suez. Their Caucasian origin is confirmed by their language, which, with the other Hamitic idioms, had, as M. Lenormant shows, a relationship to the Semitic languages, the two families having a common mother language, the native country of which was in Asia at the east of the basin of the Euphrates and Tigris. We are thus taken to the region where the old Chaldean civilisation flourished for the place of origin of the Egyptians; but did they belong to the same Kushite stock? In endeavouring to answer this question, it is necessary to remember that before the foundation of the Empire by Menes Egypt had comprised two kingdoms, that of Lower Egypt or the country of the north, and that of Upper Egypt or the country of the south. These kingdoms must have existed a considerable period, judging from the fact that the later Monarchs21 carried two crowns to indicate the dominion22 exercised over the two great131 divisions of the Empire, and probably it represented some race difference in their inhabitants. The Aryan character described by M. L. Page Renouf to the Egyptian mythology23, and the features of many of the figures represented on the tombs of the fourth Dynasty, might lead us to suppose that the earliest Egyptians belonged to the Aryan stock. This opinion is, perhaps, confirmed by the consideration that the earliest and most sacred towns of the Egyptians were situate in Upper Egypt.
M. Lenormant thinks that the descendants of Mizraim settled in Egypt at different epochs, and that the earliest settlers, the Anamim of the Old Testament24 and the Anou of the hieroglyphic25 inscriptions26, were driven by the later ones into different parts of Egypt, but principally into Nubia. The former may, therefore, have been pure Aryans, the southern country being referred to as the home of the race; although the Empire was first established in Lower Egypt, its chief centre being Memphis, from which its culture gradually overspread the whole country. The early inhabitants of the Delta28 region were represented at a later date by the Hyksos, who have been identified by Professor Duncker with the Philistines29 of the Syrian Coast. This people are spoken of in the Book of Genesis as descendants of Mizraim, and their neighbours, the Ph?nicians, stood in the same relation to the northern Egyptians as did the Kushites of Chaldea. Like the latter peoples, the Ph?nicians were great builders. The remains30 of vast structures still exist throughout Ph?nicia, which was known to the ancient Babylonians as Martu, “the west.” Among modern writers,132 M. Renan is of opinion that “singular relations exist between the ethnographic, historic, and linguistic31 position of Yemen and that of Ph?nicia,” as showing that there was a close relationship between the latter and the ancient people of Southern Arabia. Mr. Baldwin accepts both these views, and comes to the conclusion that the first great civilisers and builders of antiquity were the Kushites or Aithiopians of Southern Arabia, and that they colonised or civilised Chaldea, Ph?nicia, and Egypt. Tradition speaks of Kepheus as one of the great sovereigns of ancient Aithiopia, whose kingdom extended from the Mediterranean32 to the Persian Gulf, and whose capital was Joppa, one of the most ancient cities of Ph?nicia. We may well believe that this very early Kushite kingdom comprised part of Northern Africa, and therefore that it included the Delta of the Nile with the great city, Memphis, of the Egyptian pyramid builders. The similarity in many features of the Ph?nician and Egyptian architecture points to a close connection between those peoples, and a portion of the Kushite race which peopled Ph?nicia doubtless settled in the Delta, from whence its culture would easily spread throughout the Nile Valley. It is certain that Southern Arabia was the seat of a very primitive33 civilisation, which influenced all the regions around. Ph?nicia, however, would seem to have been most intimately allied34 with Chaldea, the origin of whose civilisation, although ascribed to the fish-god Oannes, can hardly be traced to Arabia.
According to the Biblical writer, Kush was the eldest35 son of Ham, who was also the father of Mizraim, Phut,133 and Canaan. All these peoples were great builders, and it is very probable, therefore, that they, as well as the Kushites, derived36 their knowledge from a common source. In this case, and even if Mizraim, Canaan, and Phut were the descendants rather than the brethren of Kush, the civilisation with which the Kushites are accredited37 was, in reality, that of the earlier Hamites. The probability is that all the peoples belonging to the Hamitic stock possessed38 the elements of a very ancient civilisation, which was handed down in the most direct line through the Kushites of Chaldea. M. Perrot accepts the opinion of M. Oppert, that when the primitive Chaldeans first settled in the plains of Sennaar they already had a national organisation39, and that they possessed writing, the most necessary industries, a religion, and a complete legislation. If this was so we shall have to seek a very primitive source for the Kushite or Hamitic civilisation. What was its origin can only be ascertained40 when the race ancestry41 of the Hamites is known. In relation to this point it must not be forgotten that Ham was the brother of Shem and Japhet, and therefore that they were all members of a common family. As the descendants of Noah, they all alike belonged to the great white or Caucasian stock. M. Lenormant, while endorsing42 this view, says that anciently, as in the present day, there was an anthropological43 distinction between the Hamites and the Shemites, which he accounts for by supposing the former to have become intermixed with a dark or black race, which they found already established in the country to which they spread, while the Shemites, who stayed behind,134 preserved the purity of the white race. The facts of linguistic science and anthropology44 can thus be made to agree, but M. Lenormant has to admit that the Eastern Kushites cannot be brought within that theory, as from the earliest historical period they have spoken a language radically45 distinct from those of the Shemites and the other Hamitic peoples. He adds that the coast between the Persian Gulf and the Indus appears to have been, from a remote antiquity, the point of meeting and fusion46 of two distinct races having brown complexions48, but inclining more or less to pure black. The Eastern Kushites are thus confounded by a gradual series of transitions with the Dravidians of India. This reference to the Dravidians is perfectly49 just, as there is no doubt, whatever may be the case now, that originally they partook of the high qualities possessed by the peoples of the Kushite stock. As a race they were noted50 for their love of art and commerce, and General Forlong, after having examined minutely most of the famous shrines51 of India, came to the conclusion “that there is nothing to equal those of Dravidia, save some small ones in Western India, which, in their completeness, form, and conception, denote the same master builders who, as Jainas, &c., learned in Mysore and the South under those great architects.” There is indeed reason to believe that the marvellous temples of Cambodia and Java, of which the ruins still exist, were erected by Dravidians from India. M. Moura, the learned author of a history of Cambodia, has established that the great architects of that kingdom were the peoples to whom the name of Khmerdoms is given by their de135scendants, the Khmers. They were of Hindoo origin, and emigrated from the neighbourhood of Delhi in the fifth century before Christ. Whether the original Khmers were of pure Aryan stock is, however, very doubtful, and it is extremely probable that they were Hinduised Dravidians. The Hindoos, to whom the civilisation of Java is ascribed, are spoken of as coming from Kling, by which is meant the Dravidian Telinga.
If, as M. Lenormant supposes, the Eastern Kushites became fused with a brown or black race, it does not follow that this race was originally black, or that it belonged to a negroid stock. All the Hamites, and especially the Kushites, were of a more or less dark complexion47, but the black hue52 may have been acquired through natural influences operating during a vast period of time. The Dravidians have, at least from a linguistic standpoint, Turanian affinities53, and it is now almost universally admitted that the earliest civilised inhabitants of Chaldea belonged to the great Turanian family of peoples who are usually spoken of as the yellow race. There is no doubt that a yellow race, whose languages had an affinity54 on the one side with the languages of the Altaic peoples, and on the other side with the Dravidian dialects, and who preceded the Shemitic and Japhetic peoples in material civilisation, existed in Eastern Asia alongside of the white race.
M. Ujfalvy supposes the Eastern Turanians to have descended55 the first from the plateau of the Altai; to be followed by the Western Turanians, who occupied Northern Europe from time immemorial; the children136 of Noah being the last to quit the primeval home. If this was so we can well understand that the average Turanian physical type must present peculiarities56 which distinguish it easily from that of the Caucasian races.
What we have now to do with is the origin of primitive civilisation, and everything points to the early Turanians as the people among whom it was developed. We have already seen that if the primitive Chaldeans did not belong to the Turanian stock they were intimately associated with Turanian peoples to whom they are thought to have been indebted for much of their culture. The great western division of the Turanian race appears to have possessed an advanced civilisation long before its Aryan neighbours. The Tchoudes, who are described by Ujfalvy as the most ancient people of the Altaic race, were noted metallurgists, while the Permians and the Finns are supposed to have taught art and agriculture to the Slavs and Scandinavians of Northern Europe. M. Reclus remarks that, not only did the Turanians teach their neighbours the use of iron and other metals, but they have the glory of having given to us most of our domestic animals, and probably also the greater part of our most useful cultured plants. Finally, the Turanians were, says M. Lenormant, “the constructors of the first towns, and the inventors of metallurgy and of the first rudiments58 of the principal arts of civilisation.” He adds that they were137 “addicted59 to rites60 which were reproved by Yahveh, and were viewed with as much hatred61 as superstitious62 terror by the populations still in the pastoral state whom they had preceded in the path of material progress and invention, but who remained morally more pure and elevated.”
This description, applied by M. Lenormant to the Turanians, has reference primarily to the Cainites, and it carries the origin of material civilisation much farther back in time than would have been thought possible a few years ago. The facts mentioned in connection with Cain and his descendants strikingly confirm the opinion that the Kushite civilisation was handed down from a period which, in relation to the Deluge63 of Genesis, may be called antediluvian64. The tradition of the Deluge is a primitive belief of the three white races, the Aryan, the Semitic, and the Hamitic. It appears to have been originally limited to the peoples of the Caucasian stock, and this fact requires that the Turanians should be excluded from the effect of the supposed catastrophe65. The yellow race, therefore, may claim an “antediluvian” descent, and as Noah, the progenitor66 of the white races, belonged to the Sethite stock, the common ancestor of the Turanian peoples must have been a Cainite.
The first public event recorded in the life of Cain after his exile was the building of a town, which he called Enoch, after his first-born son. This town has been identified with the city of Khotan, which is situate in the region where Cain is thought to have fixed67 his abode68. According to Abel Rémusat the traditions of that city, preserved in the native chronicles and referred to by the Chinese historians, go back to a much earlier period than those of any other city of Central Asia. Baron69 d’Eckstein has, moreover, shown that138 Khotan was the centre of a district in which the art of metallurgy has been practised from the remotest antiquity. This is important, for Tubal Cain, the youngest son of Lamekh, the descendant of Cain, is said in Genesis to have been “an instructor70 of every artificer in brass71 and iron.”
The ancestors of the present Chinese appear not to have been acquainted with the blacksmith’s art when they first descended into the plains, although it was practised by the neighbouring Tibetan tribes, who, we can hardly doubt, were allied to the Kolarian population of Eastern India, if not also to the Dravidians of the south and west. The relationship of the Dravidians to the peoples of the Altaic stock, and the practice of metallurgy by the latter particularly, would tend, however, to prove that the Jabal were not, as supposed by M. Ujfalvy, Turanians who settled in Northern Asia and Europe. Those facts would rather support the view of Knobel, which identifies the Jabal and the Jubal as a musical and pastoral race, as distinguished from a settled metallurgic race to whom the name of Tubal Cain was given.
The opinion that the ancestors of the Turanian peoples were Cainites may be confirmed by reference to certain social and religious phenomena72. In the story of the slaying73 by Cain of his brother Abel there is evident reference to antagonism74 between a pastoral and an agricultural people. M. Lenormant, who sees a connection between the fratricide and the founding of the first city, has arrived at the conviction that the Chald?o-Babylon tradition concerning the primitive days of the human race included a reference to those139 two actions of Cain. He says, however, “there are certain reasons for suspecting that the Chaldeans took the part of the murderer Cain against Abel, as the Romans did that of Romulus against Remus.” The preference of the Chaldeans for the murderer agrees with the Cainite origin ascribed to their Turanian ancestors, among whom the polygamy and revenge attributed to Lamekh were no doubt as prevalent as among some of their descendants at the present day. The French writer sees in the fourth chapter of Genesis a condemnation75 of Lamekh as the prototype of fierce vengeance76, and at the same time of polygamy. The whole pre-Deluge history of man, as given in Genesis, would seem to imply the existence of an hereditary77 opposition78 between the descendants of Cain and those of Seth, who was regarded as standing79 in a special relation to the Shemites. It was evidently written in the same spirit as that which saw in the enmity between the Iranians and Turanians a constant conflict between light and darkness. The race of Cain are referred in the Biblical narrative80 as “sons of men,” a title which implies a condition of religious or moral inferiority, as compared with the “sons of God” descended from Seth. That narrative says, further, that in the time of Enoch men began to call on the name of Jehovah. This statement, which has reference only to the Sethites, supposes that the Cainites invoked81 some other god, and in the Shamanism of the Dravidians and various Turanian peoples we have no doubt a phase of the religious worship prevalent among their Cainite ancestors.
Another point in connection with religious ideas,140 which is of great importance in relation to the above subject, is the origin of serpent-worship. M. Lenormant remarks that “the Arcadians made the serpent one of the principal attributes and one of the forms of Héa.” This deity82, who closely resembles Wa?namo?nen, one of the three principal gods of the Finns, occupied a very important position in the Pantheon of the ancient Chaldeans. Héa, like the Finnish god, was “not only king of the waters and the atmosphere, he was also the spirit whence all life proceeded, the master of favourable83 spells, the adversary84 and conqueror85 of all personifications of evil, and the sovereign possessor of all science.” The worship of serpent-gods is a practice to which many of the primitive Turanian tribes have been addicted. This accounts for the curious association of serpent-worship with Buddhism86 and Siva-ism. Both of these faiths, as exhibited in the marvellous sculptures of the ruined temples of Cambodia, are intimately connected with serpent-worship. This cult27 was no doubt very prevalent among the native populations before the arrival of the Hindoos, as legend states that the banished87 Indian Prince, for whom the city of Nakon-Thom was built, married a daughter of the King of the Nagas or Serpents, and became the sovereign of the country. Serpent-worship, indeed, would seem to have been prevalent throughout Northern India. The territory of the king of the serpent city Taxila reached nearly to Delhi, and it probably extended over Kashmere and part of Afghanistan. Here was a very important centre of serpent-worship. General Forlong states that in Kashmere this cult appears everywhere,141 “and the records of the country point to its beautiful lake and mountain fastnesses as the earliest historic seats which we have of the faith.” It is remarkable88 that a King of the Naga race was reigning89 in Magadha when Gautama was born in 626 B.C., and, according to a Hindoo legend, even the Buddha90 himself had a serpent lineage. If this was so, it is not surprising that his teachings should be accepted by the Naga races, who no doubt belonged to the pre-Aryan stock.
The constant introduction of the serpent, especially of the sacred Cobra, into the sculptures of the Cambodian temples, is remarkable. M. Moura states that the ancient Khmers of Cambodia recognised both good and evil serpents, the former of which lived in the water and the latter inhabited the land. The Buddhists91 of India and Indo-China had the same idea, and M. Moura supposes that the good serpents represented the human Nagas who became Buddhists, and the bad serpents those who refused to abandon their native serpent-worship. This explanation, however, is not necessary, as the ancient Egyptians entertained analogous93 ideas. No other people, except, perhaps, the Hindoos and allied races, were more thoroughly94 imbued95 with the serpent superstition96 than the Egyptians. Mr. Cooper, in his “Observations on the Serpent Myths of Ancient Egypt,” remarks that “the reverence97 paid to the snake was not merely local, or even limited to one period of history, but prevailed alike in every district of the Pharian Empire, and has left its indelible impress upon the architecture and the arch?ology of both Upper and Lower Egypt.” The Cobra di Capello of the Hindoos and Cambodians142 was the sacred Ur?us of the Egyptians. With the latter it was used as the symbol of fecundity98 and immortality99, and was also universally assumed as the “emblem of divine and sacro-regal sovereignty.” The Ur?us was always represented in the female form, and all the Egyptian goddesses were adorned100 with it, as the images of the Hindoo gods were often surmounted101 with the sacred Naga. Among the Egyptians another kind of serpent was also held in universal veneration102. It was a gigantic species of Coluber, which from the earliest ages was regarded as “the representative of spiritual, and occasionally physical, evil.” This was the great snake of the celestial103 waters, the adversary of the gods with which the soul had to contend after death. The Egyptians had thus a good and an evil serpent, the former of which was small and the latter large. Among the Cambodians the reverse was the case, as the small serpent was the representative of evil, and the great serpent, the Naga-Naga, of good.
We have already seen that the cobra occupies an important place in the Buddhist92 sculpture, and that the great serpent with its human supporters was represented at both Amravati and Angkor Wat. Curiously104 enough a similar idea to this is represented on certain Egyptian monuments. On the sarcophagus of Oime-nepthah I. is sculptured a long serpent, which, says Mr. Robert Sewell, is doubled into folds just like the roll of the Buddhist frieze105, and having a god standing on each fold in the places occupied by the sacred emblems106 of the Buddhist faith at Amravati. He supposes the long roll of the Amravati frieze to be143 intended to represent a serpent, and to have had its origin in Western Asian or Egyptian ideas. I had already, before meeting with this observation, been struck with the similarity between the Egyptian and the Buddhist representations, especially when considered in the light of the Cambodian sculptures which undoubtedly107 represent the Naga-Naga. The gigantic serpent of the celestial ocean of Egyptian mythology is Aph?phis, the spirit of evil, and in the contest between him and Horus we have, according to M. Le Page Renouf, a form of the Indra and Vritra myth. An Accadian text speaks of “the enormous serpent with seven heads,” the “serpent which beats the waves of the sea ... extending his power over heaven and earth.” This is supposed to refer to Héa, and it reminds us of the heavenly Naga-Naga of Hindoo mythology, which, like the Accadian serpent deity, was representative of the good principle. Such was also the case among all the old Turanian nations, and it was only when, as remarked by M. Lenormant, “the Iranian traditions were fused with the ancient beliefs of the Proto-Medic religion, the serpent-god naturally became identified with the representative of the dark and bad principle.” It cannot be doubted that this was the later notion, and that the Turanian belief which associated with the serpent ideas of goodness was of earlier date. Thus, the Dragon, says Mr. Doolittle,144 “enjoys an ominous108 eminence109 in the affections of the Chinese people. It is frequently represented as the greatest benefactor110 of mankind.... The Chinese delight in praising its wonderful prospects111 and powers. It is the venerated112 symbol of good.”
The veneration of the serpent must have been of very early origin to occupy so strong a hold over the Chinese, whose spoken language, according to M. Terrien de Lacouperie, forms a link between the Accadian and the Ugro-Finnish divisions of the Ural-Altaic languages. The art of metallurgy was practised by the peoples belonging to both these divisions, and yet, according to M. Lenormant, it was not known to the early Chinese. We must thus suppose that the latter left the common home before the invention of metallurgy, and, therefore, that they represent a very early condition of the stock from which the Turanian peoples sprang. We seem, indeed, to be carried back to the very earliest period of the legendary113 history of the Cainite race, and possibly to that of the legendary ancestor of the race. According to the tradition preserved in Genesis, there was a peculiar57 association between Adam and the serpent. This animal is there the tempter Satan, but according to another view Adam, or rather Ad, who was apparently114 the traditional ancestor of a portion at least of the old Turanian stock, was himself the serpent. A rabbinical tradition makes Cain the son, not of Adam, but of the serpent-spirit Asmodeus. The name Eve is connected with an Arabic root which means both “life” and “a serpent,” and if Eve was the serpent mother, Ad must have been the serpent father of the race. There is reason for believing that Adam was the legendary ancestor of the Cainites, as distinguished from the descendants of Seth. The name Adam, no doubt, signifies in the Semitic languages “the man,” but it has been pointed115 out that the name borne by145 the son of Seth, and therefore the ancestor of Noah, that is Enoch, is in Hebrew the exact synonym116 of Adam, and also signifies “the man.” There is, moreover, almost an exact parallel between the descendants of Adam, through Cain on the one hand, and those of Seth through Enoch on the other, and each line is terminated by three heads of races, that of the Cainites by the sons of Lamekh and that of the Enocides by the grandsons of Lamekh. In the latter there is the insertion of one additional generation, that of Noah, between Lamekh and the division of the family into three branches. This is, however, capable of explanation. M. Lenormant shows, by a comparison of the various legends referring to the primitive age of mankind, that the number 7 or 10 was used by all the ancient nations as a round number for the antediluvian ancestors of the race. Tradition seemed to float between these two numbers until the influence of the Chald?o-Babylonians caused the number 10, which is that of the generations of the Sethites, to dominate over the number 7, that of the Cainites. It is to that influence we would ascribe the existence among the descendants of Seth of the legendary ancestor of the three Caucasian races. The Chaldean Noah was Khasisatra, whose vessel117 was saved during the Flood by the god Héa. This god himself was, however, supposed to have a vessel in which he sailed over the celestial ocean. He was, in fact, the fish-god Oannes, from whom the Chaldeans were said to have derived their civilisation, and we probably have in Oannes the point of identification between Héa and Noah himself. The Caucasian races, whose fathers had146 been saved from the Deluge, could not have a better legendary ancestor than the divine teacher who, issuing from the Egyptian sea, was the god Héa, not only the soul of the watery118 element but the source of all generation. If Noah, then, be a mythological119 being, introduced into the Sethite genealogy120 under Chaldean influence, Lamekh becomes the direct ancestor of the Caucasian stock as he is of the Turanian peoples. An argument in favour of this view is furnished by the Scripture16 account itself. Among the sons of Noah a peculiar position is occupied by Ham. He and his son Canaan are cursed, in like manner as Cain was cursed. The sins were different, and therefore the punishments were different, but there appears to be a kind of parallelism between Cain and Canaan for which a good reason probably existed in the mind of the writer of Genesis. We have seen that the Hamites were intimately connected with peoples belonging to the Turanian stock, and they were the special recipients121 of the old Cainite civilisation. It is, indeed, far from improbable that they were more Cainite than Sethite. The three sons of Noah would seem to answer to the three sons of Adam, and as Ham or Canaan is a reproduction of Cain, so Japheth and Shem are reproductions of Abel and Seth. In either case the elder brothers were put on one side or cursed, that the youngest brother might enjoy the inheritance. Perhaps an explanation of this conduct may be found in the race relationships of the Semites. That they had a closer affinity to the Hamites than had the Japhethites is unquestionable, and it can hardly be less doubted that the latter were the purest branch of the Caucasian147 stock. The Semites were, indeed, a mixed race, but as the Hebrews professed122 to be the chosen people it was necessary that the Hamite and Japhethite races should be put on one side, as Abel and Cain had been, that their ancestor Shem might take the chief place. The Semites thus became the representative Caucasian people who, as children of light, stand in opposition to the Turanian Hamites, in like manner as the sons of Seth were opposed to the descendants of Cain.
We have been led to believe that the civilisation of the ancient world originated among the Cainites, of whom the Turanians are the line of descendants. We have seen reason, moreover, for supposing that the particular branch of the Turanian stock, among whom the development of the art of metallurgy first took place, was the Ural-Altaic, to which the earliest inhabitants of Chaldea belonged, and whom Dr. Topinard supposes to be the connecting-link between the fair types of Europe and the brachycephalic types of Asia. The building art was one of the earliest to be developed, as is evident from the reference in Genesis to the building of a city by Cain. The erection of the first city is connected with the slaying of Abel, and therefore the origin of architecture may be referred back to almost the earliest period of human culture, and we may well suppose that some of the least cultured Turanian tribes represent a still earlier stage of Cainite civilisation. M. Lenormant objects to Herr Knobel’s theory that the Chinese and the Mongolian peoples are Cainites, that “the geographical123 horizon of the traditions of Genesis did not extend far enough to include them.” If, however, when the Chinese148 first descended into the plains they were still in the stone age, they may have been true Cainites, the more so as their immediate124 ancestors were located much nearer than are their descendants to the primeval home of Adamite man. The remarkable influence which the veneration for the serpent has obtained among the Chinese, a superstition which was developed no less remarkably125 among the peoples belonging to the Western branch of the Turanian family, and through them among the Hamitic peoples, would seem to prove that it was of primeval origin. The arts of metallurgy and architecture appear to have had a later development, and to have originated among the Turanian Aithiopians or Kuths, to whom the civilisation of the ancient world was ascribed. After leaving their home in West-Central Asia they settled in Chaldea, from whence they gradually spread throughout Western Asia, Northern Africa, and Europe, where, in later years, they came in contact with the Caucasian races, who gave a higher tone to their intellectual culture and their religious ideas, the latter being especially observable in the position assigned to the great serpent as the embodiment of evil.
Note.—The legend of the slaying of Abel by his brother Cain referred to at page 138, is met with in the Mythologies of some of the American tribes. See Monographie des Dènè Dindjié, by C. R. E. Petitot, pp. 62-84, and for a similar legend of the Aztecs, see American Hero-Myths, by Daniel G. Brinton, pp. 64-68.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
ERECTED
|
|
| adj. 直立的，竖立的，笔直的 vt. 使 ... 直立，建立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
mortar
|
|
| n.灰浆，灰泥；迫击炮；v.把…用灰浆涂接合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
polygonal
|
|
| adj.多角形的，多边形的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
scrupulously
|
|
| adv.一丝不苟地；小心翼翼地，多顾虑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
joints
|
|
| 接头( joint的名词复数 )； 关节； 公共场所（尤指价格低廉的饮食和娱乐场所） （非正式）； 一块烤肉 （英式英语） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
vertical
|
|
| adj.垂直的，顶点的，纵向的；n.垂直物，垂直的位置 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
mythologies
|
|
| 神话学( mythology的名词复数 )； 神话（总称）； 虚构的事实； 错误的观点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
civilisation
|
|
| n.文明，文化，开化，教化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
gulf
|
|
| n.海湾；深渊，鸿沟；分歧，隔阂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
subsisted
|
|
| v.（靠很少的钱或食物）维持生活，生存下去( subsist的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
indigenous
|
|
| adj.土产的，土生土长的，本地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
isthmus
|
|
| n.地峡 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
monarchs
|
|
| 君主，帝王( monarch的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
dominion
|
|
| n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
mythology
|
|
| n.神话，神话学，神话集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
hieroglyphic
|
|
| n.象形文字 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
inscriptions
|
|
| （作者）题词( inscription的名词复数 )； 献词； 碑文； 证劵持有人的登记 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
delta
|
|
| n.（流的）角洲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
philistines
|
|
| n.市侩，庸人( philistine的名词复数 )；庸夫俗子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
linguistic
|
|
| adj.语言的，语言学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
Mediterranean
|
|
| adj.地中海的；地中海沿岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
allied
|
|
| adj.协约国的；同盟国的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
eldest
|
|
| adj.最年长的，最年老的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
accredited
|
|
| adj.可接受的；可信任的；公认的；质量合格的v.相信( accredit的过去式和过去分词 )；委托；委任；把…归结于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
ascertained
|
|
| v.弄清，确定，查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
ancestry
|
|
| n.祖先，家世 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
endorsing
|
|
| v.赞同( endorse的现在分词 )；在（尤指支票的）背面签字；在（文件的）背面写评论；在广告上说本人使用并赞同某产品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
anthropological
|
|
| adj.人类学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
anthropology
|
|
| n.人类学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
radically
|
|
| ad.根本地，本质地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
fusion
|
|
| n.溶化；熔解；熔化状态，熔和；熔接 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
complexion
|
|
| n.肤色；情况，局面；气质，性格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
complexions
|
|
| 肤色( complexion的名词复数 )； 面色； 局面； 性质 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
shrines
|
|
| 圣地，圣坛，神圣场所( shrine的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
hue
|
|
| n.色度；色调；样子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
affinities
|
|
| n.密切关系( affinity的名词复数 )；亲近；（生性）喜爱；类同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
affinity
|
|
| n.亲和力，密切关系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
descended
|
|
| a.为...后裔的，出身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
peculiarities
|
|
| n. 特质, 特性, 怪癖, 古怪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
rudiments
|
|
| n.基础知识，入门 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
addicted
|
|
| adj.沉溺于....的，对...上瘾的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
superstitious
|
|
| adj.迷信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
deluge
|
|
| n./vt.洪水，暴雨，使泛滥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
antediluvian
|
|
| adj.史前的，陈旧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
catastrophe
|
|
| n.大灾难，大祸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
progenitor
|
|
| n.祖先，先驱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
abode
|
|
| n.住处，住所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
baron
|
|
| n.男爵；(商业界等)巨头，大王 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
instructor
|
|
| n.指导者，教员，教练 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
brass
|
|
| n.黄铜；黄铜器，铜管乐器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
phenomena
|
|
| n.现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
slaying
|
|
| 杀戮。 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
antagonism
|
|
| n.对抗，敌对，对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
condemnation
|
|
| n.谴责; 定罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
vengeance
|
|
| n.报复，报仇，复仇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
hereditary
|
|
| adj.遗传的，遗传性的，可继承的，世袭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
narrative
|
|
| n.叙述，故事；adj.叙事的，故事体的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
invoked
|
|
| v.援引( invoke的过去式和过去分词 )；行使（权利等）；祈求救助；恳求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
adversary
|
|
| adj.敌手，对手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
conqueror
|
|
| n.征服者，胜利者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
Buddhism
|
|
| n.佛教（教义） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
banished
|
|
| v.放逐，驱逐( banish的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
reigning
|
|
| adj.统治的，起支配作用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
Buddha
|
|
| n.佛；佛像；佛陀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
Buddhists
|
|
| n.佛教徒( Buddhist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
Buddhist
|
|
| adj./n.佛教的，佛教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
analogous
|
|
| adj.相似的；类似的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
imbued
|
|
| v.使（某人/某事）充满或激起（感情等）( imbue的过去式和过去分词 )；使充满；灌输；激发（强烈感情或品质等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
reverence
|
|
| n.敬畏，尊敬，尊严；Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称；v.尊敬，敬畏，崇敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
fecundity
|
|
| n.生产力；丰富 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
adorned
|
|
| [计]被修饰的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
surmounted
|
|
| 战胜( surmount的过去式和过去分词 )； 克服（困难）； 居于…之上； 在…顶上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
veneration
|
|
| n.尊敬，崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
celestial
|
|
| adj.天体的；天上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
curiously
|
|
| adv.有求知欲地；好问地；奇特地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
frieze
|
|
| n.(墙上的)横饰带，雕带 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
emblems
|
|
| n.象征，标记( emblem的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
ominous
|
|
| adj.不祥的，不吉的，预兆的，预示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
eminence
|
|
| n.卓越，显赫；高地，高处；名家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
benefactor
|
|
| n. 恩人，行善的人，捐助人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
prospects
|
|
| n.希望，前途(恒为复数) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
venerated
|
|
| 敬重（某人或某事物），崇敬( venerate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
legendary
|
|
| adj.传奇（中）的，闻名遐迩的；n.传奇（文学） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
synonym
|
|
| n.同义词，换喻词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
vessel
|
|
| n.船舶；容器，器皿；管，导管，血管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
watery
|
|
| adj.有水的，水汪汪的；湿的，湿润的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
genealogy
|
|
| n.家系，宗谱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
recipients
|
|
| adj.接受的；受领的；容纳的；愿意接受的n.收件人；接受者；受领者；接受器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
geographical
|
|
| adj.地理的；地区(性)的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
remarkably
|
|
| ad.不同寻常地，相当地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |