We find the precise Maya o a circle in a circle, or a dot within a
circle, repeated in the Phoenician forms for o, thus, ### and ### , and
by exactly the same forms in the Egyptian hieroglyphics; in the Runic we
have the circle in the circle; in one form of the Greek o the dot was
placed along-side of the circle instead of below it, as in the Maya.
Are these another set of coincidences?
Take another letter:
The letter n of the Maya alphabet is represented by this sign, itself
probably a simplification of some more ornate form, ### . This is
something like our letter S, but quite unlike our N. But let us examine
into the pedigree of our n. We find in the archaic Ethiopian, a language
as old as the Egyptian, and which represents the Cushite branch of the
Atlantean stock, the sign for n (na) is ### ; in archaic Phoenician it
comes still closer to the S shape, thus, ### , or in this form, ### ; we
have but to curve these angles to approximate it very closely to the
Maya n; in Troy this form was found, ### . The Samaritan makes it ### ;
the old Hebrew ### ; the Moab stone inscription gives it ### ; the later
Phoenicians simplified the archaic form still further, until it became
### ; then it passed into ### : the archaic Greek form is ### ; the
later Greeks made ### , from which it passed into the present form, N.
Pages:
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340