a name of the Greeks before they were called "Exλves. The author of this Ancient Chronicle having said that the Greeks were called "Exams, from Hellen the son of Deucalion, adds rò #górego Igaixoì naλovμsvos. But according to Herodotus (lib. ii. cap. 56) the general name of Greece, before it received the name of 'Exas, was Πελασγία: which confrms the inference, that Πελασγοί and reaixo were only different names of the same people. Now the Pelasgi migrated to Italy before the inhabitants of Greece had taken the name of "Ex. Hence the Latins, first knowing them by the names of Пy and reaizol, used no other terms for them. These coincidences, as they agree with every thing which has been said about the migration of the Pelasgi into Italy, and their introduction of the Greek language, tend also to confirm the conclusions, which have been drawn in this chapter."

The use of the Digamma by the Pelasgi being proved, the Doctor is naturally led to consider the form in which it was used, and the principle of its application. This he does ably— showing himself more studious to convince, than to please; and afraid of nothing so much as being misunderstood. Whoever attends to his arguments, cannot fail to observe how very careful he is in tracing every subject to its source. No proposition is assumed by him, as true, which admits of demonstration; and nothing which does not admit of demonstration is required to be believed upon his assertion, or made the foundation of any part of his reasoning. A striking instance of his caution in this respect occurs in the beginning of the Third Chapter, now under consideration. He is about to institute an enquiry into the form and application of the F, considered as one of the letters used by the Pelasgi; but before he proceeds, he conceives it necessary to prove that the use of letters was known to the Pelasgi. This accuracy can never be considered as excessive for, if it were possible to prove the negative of this proposition, all his reasonings concerning the form of the letters would be futile. Before we advance, it is proper to observe that Dionysius, who has described the Eolic Digamma proved by Dr. Marsh to have been used by the Pelasgi, says that it was ὥσπερ Γάμμα, διτταῖς ἐπὶ μίαν ὄρθην ἐπιζευγνύμενον ταῖς πλαγίαις.

To answer the description, our readers will observe that it may be written either as For C. These both consist of two perfect gammas, which are "joined by the two side strokes being drawn into one straight line." In the latter form, however, we have "an upright placed upon an inverted L, so as to form C." Sometimes the cross strokes are found to make an acute, not a right angle with the side stroke. The same difference has also been observed in the form of the gamma. Doubts have been

entertained of the existence of the F in Greek inscriptions, but these doubts, says Dr. Marsh, were finally removed, in 1783, by the discovery of a brass tablet, near the scite of the ancient Petilia, which may therefore be called the Petilian Tablet.

"As Petilia, or, as it is sometimes written, Petelia, was a town in the country of the Bruttii, and the Pelasgi, as was shown in the second chapter, settled in that country, the Digamma must have been used at Petilia. And accordingly we find on the Petilian tablet, the word OIKIAN very distinctly engraved FOIKIAN. The form of the Digamma in this inscription exactly corresponds with the description given by Dionysius of Halicarnassus. It consists of two perfect gammas, each of the same size, with the lines at right angles to each other. And one gamma is so placed on the other gamma, that each of them is joined by the two side strokes being drawn into one straight line, or, in the words of Dionysius, (Lib. I. Cap. 20.) διτταῖς ἐπὶ μίαν ὄρθην ἐπιζευγνύμενον ταῖς πλαγίαις. The whole figure is likewise erect. Since therefore the Digamma, which is used in the Petilian inscription, appears in every respect so perfect, since it comes so near to the Latin F, which was formed from it, and moreover appears in the same shape on the Greek coins, which have proper names beginning with the Digamma, the F, which is here used, has been cast in imitation of it: and it is certainly as good a form as any which we can adopt, when we write Greek words with the Digamma."

The next inscription, which Dr. Marsh takes notice of, is that on a brass helmet discovered in 1795, by Mr. Morritt, in the Alpheus near Olympia. This we mention on account of the interpretation suggested by the author of this treatise, of the words ANEQENTOIAÏFI. He asserts, and with the greatest probability, that the proper reading is ANE EN TOI AIFI, that is, άvib:σav T Ali, posuerunt Jovi. After maintaining the propriety of writing ἀνέθεσαν for ἀνέθεν, and τῷ for TOI, and giving his reasons for preferring this to others that have been suggested, he proceeds thus:

"It has been thought indeed anomalous to insert the Digamma in such a word as A. But to judge of the Digamma, we should not speak of insertion: for it was a constituent part of the primitive Greek alphabet; and our present forms were occasioned by the omission of it. Let us ask, therefore, in the first place, in what manner the nominative Zeus, or rather Aùs, according to the Æolic form, was originally written by the Pelasgi. They could not at first have written AEYE: for Y was an addition to the primitive Greek alphabet, which ended with T, like the Phoenician, Samaritan, Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac alphabets. F on the other hand was a constituent part of the primitive Greek alphabet; it was the sixth letter in the Greek alphabet, as the corresponding letter was in all the alphabets just mentioned. The word, therefore, which was

afterwards written ΔΕΣ, and then ΔΕΥΣ, must at first have been written AEFZ or AIFE. But the genitive and dative of AIFE could have been no other than AIFOE and AIFI, which, when the Digamma was dropped, became As and Att. Hence also we see the reason why A, and ▲ came to be the genitive and dative of Zeus. In like manner Ni↓, „pàs, upi, was originally NIFE, NIFOZ, NIFI: Nix, nivis, nivi. Κατῆλιψ, κατήλιφος, κατήλιφι was originally ΚΑΤΕΛΙΕΣ, ΚΑΤΕΛΙΟΣ, ΚΑΤΕΛΙΕΙ.

And even ip, though now considered as an adverb, was a dative, of which IFE was the nominative: for io, must at first have been written IFI. Or rather, if we may judge from Iliad, A. 38. the nominative was FIFE and the dative FIFI. For that line of Homer must have been originally written ΚΙΛΛΑΝΤΕΖΑ ΘΕΑΝΤΕΝΕΔΟΙ OTEFIFIFA ΝΑΣΣΕΙΣ.”

The next in order is the inscription, known by the name of the Elean inscription, in which the Digamma occurs not less than seven times in ten lines. This inscription, says our author,

ma.

"Is of very great importance in the history of the Eolic DigamIt was not only found in a country, where we know that the Digamma was constantly used, but it further exemplifies the application of the Digamma to words, of which we had no evidence before. We know, that in various instances, where the other Greeks used the aspirate H, the Æolians used f. But the Eolians did not always use F, where the other Greeks used H. That the Pelasgi, who brought letters into Latium, used both H and F, appears from the Latin alphabet, which contains both of those letters. It appears likewise from various Latin words, which correspond with the Greek. Though they wrote FOV and FOI (that is, and ) in the sense of sui and sibi, and FOZ in the sense of suus, yet they must have written the article with H. If they had not written HOI and HAI, the Latins would not have written HỊ and HAE. If the Pelasgi had not expressed the later forms, ga, aigi, hows, &c. by HOPA, HAIPEO, HE POE, &c. the Latins would not have written HORA, HAEREO, HEROS, &c. We could not therefore be certain that "Eras, for instance, even if aspirated, was written by the Æolians FETAZ. But that it was so written, now appears from the Elean inscription. With respect to non-aspirated words, our chief dependance has hitherto been on the corresponding Latin words. If Latin words, beginning with F or V, have Greek words corresponding to them, which begin with a vowel, we may conclude that the Pelasgi, who brought letters into Latium, used in such cases their F. Hence we infer, that s was written FIZ, oixos FOIKOΣ, &c. But for words, which have no corresponding words in Latin, we want Greek authority: and this Greek authority has hitherto been very sparingly afforded. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, (lib. i. c. 20.) has given us two such examples, avag and are, of which one only is applicable to the

poems

of Homer; for ng does not there admit the F. But the Elean inscription, in addition to the authority which it affords for rns, (sometimes written ) affords authority that ros, mos, and you, were written with F. In the second line we find EKATONFETEA: and in the third and fourth lines ΑΙΤΕFΕΠΟΣΑΙΤΕΓΑΡΓΟΝ. The corrections, therefore, which have been proposed in the versification of Homer, receive from this inscription a very remarkable and very unexpected confirmation. Among the words, to which Heyne, in his edition of Homer, has in the marginal emendations prefixed F, on the ground, that the metre required it, we find all the four words irns, ros, Tos, and go. Again, this inscription confirms the opinion, that words, now beginning with an aspirated 'P, began in the old Eolic with IP, though the later Æolians, according to the Greek grammarians, began such words with BP. For rea is here very distinctly engraved FPATPA. Further, the Elean inscription shows, that the ancient name of Elis was FAAIZ. Lastly, the Elean inscription shows, that where the Y is now used, F was frequently used by the ancient Æolians. For we find ΤΟΙΡΓΑΛΕΙΟΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΟΙΣΕΡΑ ΟΙΟΙΣ, which would now be written τοῖς Ηλείοις καὶ τοῖς Εὐαοίοις. Instead, therefore, of the present or thography EYA, the Eleans used EFA."

Other curious inscriptions are mentioned by Dr. Marsh, and many particulars ingeniously pointed out concerning them; but we cannot now notice them. We are sorry to be obliged to resist an inclination we feel to give to our readers a passage, in which he accounts for the character being used to denote the number 6, by referring it to the Digamma.

S

The fourth chapter is the most important in the book. Its object is to determine the original Pelasgic pronunciation of the Digamma, The opinions of eminent men upon this subject are various and discordant; and when Dr. Marsh comes forward to assert, that F was pronounced like the Latin F, he has to enter the lists with many distinguished scholars both ancient and modern. We cannot do better, than let him explain in his own words the course of argument by which he purposes to attain his object.

"As the Greek F corresponds to the Latin F, both in form and in alphabetic order, (it having been the sixth letter in both alphabets,) the inference which naturally presents itself, is, that the two letters agreed also in sound. The letters of one alphabet admit of three analogies in reference to the letters of another. They may agree in form; they may agree in alphabetic order; they may agree in sound. Now when the two first analogies take place, the presumption is, (unless reasons can be given to the contrary) that the third also was not wanting. If the Latins borrowed their F from the Greek F, and assigned to it the sixth place in their alphabet, because it had the sixth place in the Greek, it is not pro

bable that they pronounced it in any other way, than that in which they heard the Greeks pronounce it. We must conclude, therefore, that the Greek F corresponded in all respects to the Latin F. And this inference is confirmed by the circumstance, that the very letter, namely the Latin V, to which the Greek F is supposed to have corresponded, agreed in all its analogies with another letter of the Greek alphabet; analogies, which could not hold good in respect to two letters."

Here we find, that it is the object of the author to prove, in the first place, that an entire correspondence subsisted between the Greek r and the Latin V. We omit his demonstration, and give only the inference he deduces from it.

"Since then the Latin V was analogous to the Greek V in all its various relations, it could be only so far analogous to any other letter of the Greek alphabet, as the Greek V itself was analogous to that letter. We must conclude, therefore, that the Latin V, as well as the Greek V, had a cognate sound with the Greek F, but so far differed from it, as the one was, the other daru. What then shall we conclude, with respect to the analogy of the Greek F to the Latin F, which was likewise daab? No other inference remains, than that the correspondence between them was entire. We have seen that the Greck V corresponds to the Latin V, in order, form, and sound. We know also, that the Greek F corresponded to the Latin F, in order and in form. Consequently they must have corresponded in the only remaining analogy, that of sound. For, if this third analogy of the Greek F be referred to the Latin V, we interfere with the analogy, which this same Latin V has been shown to bear in all its relations to another letter. We must conclude, therefore, that there was a perfect analogy between the Greek F and the Latin F, as there was between the Greek v and the Latin V. In this manner the two alphabets preserve their harmony: whereas if we refer a letter, which is nearly at the head of one alphabet, to a letter which is nearly at the bottom of the other, and moreover to a letter which has a very different form, the harmony of the two alphabets is totally destroyed."

To prove that the Latin F is the proper representative of the Greek F, as well in its application, as in its form and alphabetic order, he gives a list of Latin words derived from the Greek, and beginning with F. These examples are written first according to the present Greek form, then according to the old Aolic or Pelasgic form, and thirdly according to the Latin form. In the writing of these he tells us he has observed the five following rules.

First, "That whenever a word, now beginning with in Greek, begins with F in Latin, that same word was written likewise with F by those Pelasgi, who brought letters into Latium."

Secondly, "That whenever Greek words, now beginning with