The Greek word for soul is xn, in which, though there are only four letters, we have, however, six words, since, when analysed, this word becomes is-ip-iv-ic-iv-e, the exact meaning of this analysis is all life, that is, "the Divinity," or "eternal life;" and this meaning does not differ in the least from that already found to belong to the Latin, English, and French words for soul. Indeed, sol, when analysed thus, is-o-il, makes is al, that is, all is, which means "all life;" and this we can the more easily perceive by giving to is its form of Be, which we know is also equal to vie or life, so that all is becomes "all being," or "all life." Nor does this meaning differ in the least from that to be found in soul, when thus analysed, is-ail, since, by the dropping of the i, this becomes is al, in which case it is exactly like sol. As the French word has been shown to be the same as soul, I need not observe that it must also literally mean, " all life."

The above analysis (is-ip-iv-ic-iv-e) of the Greek word for soul gives the meaning I assign it, namely, "all life," thus, "the life life, the life life." Here we have three words in apposition to three words, so that the one half of this word is only a definition or explanation of the other half, and the idea of totality is, we may observe, signified by the repetition of the word life. We can the more easily discover the six words forming the analysis of Vuxn, by writing this word in the Roman characters, thus, "psuche," and remarking that the e with which

it ends is eta or life; and that the h which precedes this letter becomes, with a vowel before it thus, ih, equal to iv or life. The rest of the analysis of this word requires no observation; for the reader needs not now be told that p and v are used indifferently.

Thus might I continue, and so fill volumes with the wonders of this divine science divine it may well be called, since every particle of it is a name for the Divinity; and since the more its logical order and extraordinary simplicity are closely inquired into, the more difficult it is to believe that human wisdom alone can have laid the foundation of so admirable a system. That which we have hitherto known by the name of grammar, and according to the principles of which we have supposed language to be constructed, is, it must be allowed, of very ancient date, since all trace of its origin had been lost long before Plato and Aristotle flourished. To say that a system which has for such a vast length of time prevailed over the whole world, is devoid of considerable merit, were to oppose the judgment of not only the multitude of every clime and age of which we have any knowledge, but also that of the wisest philosophers and most learned professors that ever lived. Hence a very high authority asserts, that to have reduced language thus to rules is one of the greatest efforts of the human mind.* But if this system has till now appeared so perfect, it arose from nothing better * See passage quoted from D'Alembert, vol. i. p. 47. of this work.

having been known; for, notwithstanding all its merits, what is it compared to the one now discovered ? In it words are divided into several classes, for the most part into nine or ten, but of all these not so much as one has been ever known, since no definition has been ever given of any one of them that can, when put to the test, as I have shown, bear investigation. Thus, to consider only what appears to lie most on the surface, may we not, from what has been seen in this work, fearlessly assert, that not since the science of languages has been lost has any grammarian known so much as a substantive or an adjective, or the letter A or the letter B, or why words bear their present forms more than any others, or what these forms imply? Hence it were to argue an extraordinary want of common sense and judgment to compare the system by which no word can in any way be critically known, with that which, in this respect, leaves nothing to desire, since all words and not only of one's own tongue, but of every tongue on earthmay by its application be thoroughly accounted for. Thus it can be shown how they make, not nine or ten parts, but only one; and then how this one part, though comprising all words, may be traced up to a single one, namely, IO; and then how this one word may be reduced to a single letter, namely, I or O— for these two, from their being equal, make but one; and then how this single letter may be reduced to a mere speck, to the minute sign placed over the letter i; in which, too,

we discover, as has been already sufficiently proved, not only the origin of all words and letters, but of all the figures and forms ever traced or imagined.

Here I do not remark how every word, besides carrying in itself its own happy meaning, contains an accurate definition of certain mysterious truths - the religious principles that must have once prevailed over the earth. for, without taking this extraordinary circumstance into account, there is in the mere simplicity of the logical order here shown to belong to this science, a great deal more than the human mind- that is, when we judge man from what he has already accomplished appears capable of conceiving. Hence the thing hitherto called the science of grammar must seem, when compared to what is here discovered, gross and earthly in the last degree; and though we may not, without considerable difficulty, take the latter for any thing less than divine, it requires no great effort to conceive how the former may have very well been the production of human contrivance alone. Now are we to believe that this real science of languages, for the other is only nominally one, has been brought down to the earth by divine beings from above? There is no necessity for entertaining this belief; but there is one thing of which we may be certain, and it is this: the intelligent beings to whom we are indebted for this science must have had minds greatly superior to those of whose mental endowments we know any thing, for there is visibly in it a far richer vein of

pure wisdom than there is in any other labour ever achieved by man.

But what could render men more intelligent in those remote times than they have been since ? The absence of vice; for this degrades and blunts the understanding, just as it enfeebles the body. This opinion brings me to almost the last important .communication I have to make, and which may be gathered from this statement. I have analysed a great many words, but there is not in any one of them aught which can induce me to believe that when they were first made man was acquainted with sin; but I find, on the contrary, that words to which we now attach a very bad meaning imply, when analysed, exactly the reverse of what we understand by them. Thus vice means "life," which is synonymous with the Divinity; and evil has precisely the same meaning; or we may say that the latter is the same as "bliss," since the analysis of this word is ib-il-isse, which is, we know, equal to ev-il-esse, and means, "the thing evil." It is also for this reason that there were in the beginning no negatives, and that poor meant "power." When we analyse the word misery thus, mis-er-e, it has a bad meaning, since this implies, "want it is." But the word mis, which is the same as miss, (to fail, to want,) and which is here used as a negative, had not always this meaning, since, when analysed, it becomes im-is, which is equal to un-Be, that is, unbeing, or not being, and this un was once a real affirmative, and meant "one," or "the Divinity."