discover the meaning of multitudes of words in all languages. Thus beauty, modesty, facility, duty, &c. are all contracted from beau-it-e, modest-it-e, facileit-e, du-it-e, that is, "beau it is," "modest it is," "facile it is,"" due it is," &c. But in the beginning the order of these and all such words was it-e-beau, it-e-modeste, it-e-facile, it-e-du, &c., meaning, "it is beau," "it is modest," &c.; after which the it e fell behind as usual. Thus we discover at a glance not only all the words in French and English ending as these do, but all those in Latin in tas; such as charitas, tenuitas, &c., which are, when we do not want to trace them up to their very birth, to be analysed thus, char-ita-is, tenu-ita-is. Here ita is for it ea (the thing), both these words having become an article, such as we have already seen them in vita, which must have first been ita vi (the life). The English scholar may be made to understand this Latin ending (tas) by being told that it is the same as the two words that is when contracted to that's; and the German scholar may clearly understand it, by being told that it is equal to das, which is composed of da is (that is); but as da is still a compound word, it being the contraction of id-ea (the thing); hence das is composed of three words (id ea is), just as itas is composed of it ea is, and that's of the ea it is, or theo it is (the thing it is, the one it is). But as these Latin words in tas did not take this ending in three parts, but in two (ita-is), we are not, when accounting for them, to analyse them otherwise than above. Of course,

when we do not understand what is meant by the word preceding itas, which may happen to be no longer in use, we are to analyse it, in order to discover its meaning. Char in charitas makes ic-ea-ir, or rather ic-iv-ea-ir, the former meaning, it the first thing, and the latter, it of the first thing, either of which is consequently a name for the Divinity. And when we remark that char is the same as car (ic ea ir), and that this is the same as car in carus, (at first, us car, "the dear,") we perceive that charitas is the same as ita is carus, "that is dear," "that which is dear;" in other words, "that it is a dear thing," and is hence synonymous with the first thing, and also the Divinity. Hence we discover that men must have in the beginning understood by dear, when this word was applied to worldly objects, "that which held a first place in rank or merit ;" and that in its higher signification (as in charitas, for instance) it indicated the "Godhead." Then were we to give to charitas French and English forms corresponding with its meaning, we should translate it by chere-it-é and dear-it-y, or divinité and Divinity. As the radical part of first is in fir, since the whole word makes fir-est or est fir, meaning, "it is fir," we may discover that there is no difference between fir and dear as to meaning, when analysed. Thus fir in first is pronounced, and very properly, as if written fur; and this we know is for if-ii-ir, which means, "the one one thing," or "the life, life;" by one one thing is meant, "one thing in the extreme," and conse

quently the "first thing;" and by life life is meant "life in the extreme," or "all life," and consequently the "Divinity." Now if we change, as we may do, the f in if-i-ir for a d, we shall have id-ii-ir, of which the contracted sound may very well be dear; hence dear and first may, in some languages, be the same word. Then when we pronounce first, as if written furst, it is because it must have anciently been first, and that an i has been dropped; but as this is a word in frequent use, its primitive pronunciation has been happily preserved. The i might, however, have very well been pronounced like ea in dear, in which case both letters would not become one letter, that is, a u. In this word, if-ii-ir, we discover the French word fuire, and in this case we are to translate it by "life, life," or "going, going," that is, "life or motion in the extreme." Here also we discover fear; but then the " is not contracted to u, for each letter is heard, and both are pronounced like ee or ea in dear. And from thus perceiving that men in the beginning had but one word for fuire and fear (or for flight and fear), we discover what their idea of fear was. Here, too, we find the original of further; but the ii has become u, and is made to name a single idea; and hence this word is to be thus analysed, if-u-ir (the go, go, the go). If-u-ir, which three words have been contracted to fur, are equal to go go; so that when a person or a thing was distant, men in the beginning said, he is the-go-go, thus signifying, by the repetition of go,

that it was necessary to go much in order to reach such an object. And to this double go was added still another, in order to increase upon it, and make the comparative degree, which was done by the two words the er instead of the go, er being here as a pronoun. Then further is literally "the go, go, and the go." The superlative degree furthest means, "the go go, THE BEING HEAD," that is, "the being ahead;" for s is here for is or be, as we shall see in the analysis of Bηra; and t is for head or the Divinity, this letter having such a meaning, as I have already shown, but which I am to show still more fully in the alphabet. The fur in further may also with great propriety be rendered thus, er fu, "the go go," or "the flight," yet still the meaning is the same. But as an instance of the same word having very opposite meanings, we may cite fuire, which has just been accounted for, and shown to mean "life, life," or "going, going," though such will also serve, as every body can conceive, to mean "all life, or the Divinity."

As farther does not differ from further but in the first syllable, we need only, in order to explain it, account for far. This word is to be thus analysed, if-o-ir, and which also means, the "go, go," o being here for the sun or motion; then from the i preceding the ƒ having been dropped, and from the foir falling together, the word far has been made. Hence further and furthest, and farther and farthest, are equally correct; and this is satisfactory to know, for as the highest authorities were divided

in opinion respecting these words, nobody knew how to use them. But fo, it may be remarked, means "an enemy," and consequently foir, which must have first been ir fo (the fo), ought to have a meaning quite different from go go, or far. This is a very true observation, and it has cost me a great deal of hard thinking; for when I first endeavoured to explain the difficulty connected with it, I had not analysed the letters of the Greek alphabet. This is not the place to account for fo, or foe, when it means "an enemy;" but I may forget this single question in the many difficulties I have yet to encounter, and my memory has by dint of incessant thinking almost forsaken me. The character ƒ has, besides its other meanings, that of half, and hence it is separated into two equal parts by a bar in the middle, thus, f, and hence also the character by which it is represented in Greek is made thus, in which we see an o divided also in two equal parts. Then fo means here half the o; that is, "a hook or a bill," with which men fought in ancient times, this arm having the form of half an o. Hence it must have been made in the shape of a c. As to its handle, which we may represent by attaching the figure 1 to a c, thus, q, it was probably in wood; and hence from its not being really a part of the hook, it was not at all considered when the form of this arm was designed by half an o. Then when men said, in ancient times, "that foes were coming, or running," their words literally meant, "the hooks are coming, or the hooks are