DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1167#0031
a.2.± The disappearance of Coptic as a spoken language
Coptic remained in productive written use until about the 14th century ad. It is difficult,
however, to determine the time at which Coptic became extinct as a spoken language, but
it is generally agreed that Coptic was preserved longest in Upper Egypt. O'Leary (1984:
243-249) assumes that Coptic had already ceased to be in spoken use in the i3/i4th
centuries ad.11 Certain sources which, however, are of questionable reliability suggest
that Coptic was still spoken in the 17th century12. The existence of a trilingual Ga'gz
(Ethiopic) — Arabic — Coptic glossary of everyday vocabulary which is assigned to
approximately the early 18th century ad (Kg° §2.9.3) seems to indicate that Coptic was
still useful to know at that time.
Quibell (1901: 87) states that he had heard that "3o years ago" there were still elderly
people around Qus and Naqada in Upper Egypt who remembered that they had heard
Coptic spoken in their youth. This would have been approximately at the beginning of the
19th century. It is unclear how trustworthy these testimonies are.
There were a few elderly inhabitants of the Upper Egyptian village iz-Zentya that also
bears a Coptic name bi-Suhal (= *FII-COACe?v) who claimed that, although they them-
selves were no longer fluent in Coptic, they had still heard their parents speak it as a
living tongue while they were in their youth. When Werner Vycichl was informed of this
in the mid 1930s, he visited these people in order to record what they still had in their
memories. Unfortunately, he told us nothing about the technique of inquiry by which he
collected the materials. The results were published in Vycichl (1936), Worrell (1987),
and Worrell & Vycichl (1942). A rather mysterious remark by Till (1954: 156), however,
has cast doubt on the credibility of Vycichl's recordings.13 Cf. also the comments by
Jozef Vergote in Legrain (1945: 124-126) on an inhabitant of the same village who was
shown to have faked that he still had a command of Coptic.
In modern Egypt, there are a few enthusiasts who are trying to revive Bohairic Coptic as
a living language.^ For this purpose, booklets are written which attempt to teach spoken
Coptic for modern everyday use (e.g. Ishaq 1972).
a.2.2 Coptic as a language of liturgy in modern Egypt
From the 9th century on, the (originally northern) Bohairic dialect became the prevalent
11 Cf. also Simon (1936).
12 Cf. Vergote (1973/ 83: la, § 1).
i3 "Uber die Angelegenheit der «koptisch sprechenden Familien» in Zeniya gibt es an
massgebender Stelle eine vbllig andere Ansicht. Es ware mit Riicksicht auf die
Wichtigkeit dieser Frage sehr wiinschenswert, wenn diese einmal geaussert wiirde,
so dass die wissenschaftliche Welt darin nicht einseitig orientiert bleibt." To the
best of my knowledge, this opinion has not been expressed by now.
14 On this topic cf. Ishao. (1993).
3i
Coptic remained in productive written use until about the 14th century ad. It is difficult,
however, to determine the time at which Coptic became extinct as a spoken language, but
it is generally agreed that Coptic was preserved longest in Upper Egypt. O'Leary (1984:
243-249) assumes that Coptic had already ceased to be in spoken use in the i3/i4th
centuries ad.11 Certain sources which, however, are of questionable reliability suggest
that Coptic was still spoken in the 17th century12. The existence of a trilingual Ga'gz
(Ethiopic) — Arabic — Coptic glossary of everyday vocabulary which is assigned to
approximately the early 18th century ad (Kg° §2.9.3) seems to indicate that Coptic was
still useful to know at that time.
Quibell (1901: 87) states that he had heard that "3o years ago" there were still elderly
people around Qus and Naqada in Upper Egypt who remembered that they had heard
Coptic spoken in their youth. This would have been approximately at the beginning of the
19th century. It is unclear how trustworthy these testimonies are.
There were a few elderly inhabitants of the Upper Egyptian village iz-Zentya that also
bears a Coptic name bi-Suhal (= *FII-COACe?v) who claimed that, although they them-
selves were no longer fluent in Coptic, they had still heard their parents speak it as a
living tongue while they were in their youth. When Werner Vycichl was informed of this
in the mid 1930s, he visited these people in order to record what they still had in their
memories. Unfortunately, he told us nothing about the technique of inquiry by which he
collected the materials. The results were published in Vycichl (1936), Worrell (1987),
and Worrell & Vycichl (1942). A rather mysterious remark by Till (1954: 156), however,
has cast doubt on the credibility of Vycichl's recordings.13 Cf. also the comments by
Jozef Vergote in Legrain (1945: 124-126) on an inhabitant of the same village who was
shown to have faked that he still had a command of Coptic.
In modern Egypt, there are a few enthusiasts who are trying to revive Bohairic Coptic as
a living language.^ For this purpose, booklets are written which attempt to teach spoken
Coptic for modern everyday use (e.g. Ishaq 1972).
a.2.2 Coptic as a language of liturgy in modern Egypt
From the 9th century on, the (originally northern) Bohairic dialect became the prevalent
11 Cf. also Simon (1936).
12 Cf. Vergote (1973/ 83: la, § 1).
i3 "Uber die Angelegenheit der «koptisch sprechenden Familien» in Zeniya gibt es an
massgebender Stelle eine vbllig andere Ansicht. Es ware mit Riicksicht auf die
Wichtigkeit dieser Frage sehr wiinschenswert, wenn diese einmal geaussert wiirde,
so dass die wissenschaftliche Welt darin nicht einseitig orientiert bleibt." To the
best of my knowledge, this opinion has not been expressed by now.
14 On this topic cf. Ishao. (1993).
3i