more useful and more permanent. He obferves further, that many European words, which agree in fignification with those of the Eaft, differ in their elements, yet it is moft certain that the former are derived from the latter; and hence he infers the neceffity of a Clavis Etymologica, to fhew the changes which have taken place in the elements of words in their paffage from one language to another; either according to the different effects of climate on the organs of articulation, or the different manners of nations inhabiting the fame climates. Without taking upon us to determine how far this fcheme is practicable, or whether the talents of our Author are fuch as would afford a fair profpect of faccefs in the execution of it, we must give him due credit for the modefty with which he speaks of his own labours.

Cum autem hujufmodi Clavis explicationem completam, omnibufque numeris abfolutam, fpeciminum horum limites haud admittant; littus tantum iftius, ut ita dicam, immenfi maris legere mihi propofui. Que quidem opeila, nunc levi tantum brachio a me fufcepta, atque expedita, tum in prafenti, ut fpero, prælucebit tyronibus ad orien talis eruditionis palmum laudemque contendentibus; tum in omne reliquum tempus materiam fuppeditabit ad id, quod leviffimis tantum frittu is a me percurfum eft, nová exemplorum copiâ inftruendum, illuftrioreque adhuc luce perfundendum.'

The book is published at the expence of the University of Dublin, and is dedicated to the Provoft and Fellows of Trinity Coliege, whofe patronage, however, does not appear to have placed the Author beyond the reach of indigence; which, though it fometimes kindles the latent fpark of genius in the breaft of the indolent, too frequently overwhelms the mind with languor and defpondency; and by exacting the fame degree of exertion at the happieft and the most unpropitious feafons, evidently fubjects a writer to difadvantages, which, though we cannot recognize them, as critics, we muft commiferate, as men.

We fincerely lament, that Mr. V. had not the means of publifhing his work without the affiftance of the Univerfity, particularly as the total want of Hebrew and Arabic types, on which he refts his apology for printing the Oriental words in European characters, exhibits no very favourable idea of the state of Eaftern literature in the fifter kingdom. We fhall endeavour, however, to do him as much justice as we can, by fupplying this defect, in the few fpecimens we mean to produce of his work.

The first part of the book is compofed of obfervations on the Coran: but we are forry to fay that they do not, either from their number or importance, merit any particular character.

With respect to the criticisms on the Old Teftament, we will not controvert our Author's pofition, that the English verfion may frequently be corrected by confulting the language of the Coran. We are well aware of the affinity which fubfifts between

the

H

the Hebrew and Arabic languages; and we may add that words which are rarely to be found in the former, admit of a fatisfactory interpretation, from their frequent occurrence in the latter. We are fatisfied, that the primary fenfe of words, whofe roots are wanting in the Hebrew, may often be determined by a reference to the Arabic, in which their roots are ftill preferved. We recollect that * Maimonides, Tanchum of Jerufalem, and other ancient Rabbins, not bigotted, like their fucceffors, to the imaginary fanctity and durάpxsix of their own tongue, inftead of thinking it contaminated by explanations drawn from the language of Mohammed, applied their knowledge of Arabic to the illuftration of the facred text with equal zeal and ability. The labours of Chriftian scholars will never cease to be remembered, till the names of Pocock and Bochart are forgotten, and till the annotations of Schultens and Hunt no longer adorn our public libraries, or attract the general attention of scholars. We with, indeed, we could enroll the name of Mr. Vieyra in this illuftrious catalogue; but we cannot help obferving, that, though he merits much praife for his intentions, and though he certainly difplays no vulgar proficiency in the Eaftern languages, his remarks are but unfuccefsfully directed to the end he had in view. To the divine they certainly convey little useful or important information; to the orientalift they open no new or recondite fources of grammatical difquifition; and to the general reader they moft affuredly do not come recommended by that fpecies of criticifm, which points out beauties unknown before, which fupplies tafte with objects congenial to itself, and exemplifies the elegance it defcribes. If there be any exceptions to thefe obfervations the following criticifms may, perhaps, be among the number :

is thus rendered by וילך אליו אגג מעדנת .32 .I Sam. xv

the English translators, And Agag came unto him delicately. Mr. Vieyra proposes that we fhould tranflate y languide, remiffe, invito, from the fenfe of the Arabic word, which fignifies remiffio, languor. Pfalm xvii. 3.

my

I am utterly purposed that mouth fhall not offend, our Author thinks will be better rendered,

*The teftimony of Maimonides on this fubject is clear and decifive,

أما اللغة العربية والعبرانية فقد اتغف كل علم اللغتين انهما لغة واحدة بلا شك

من

Arabicam vero linguam, et Hebraicam, omnes qui probe callent, utramque unam et eandem haud dubio effe profitentur. Vide Cafiri Biblioth. Arab. Hifp. Efcur. vol. i. p. 292.

S13

agreeably

agreeably with the fenfe of the Arabic, capistro alligavi ne tranfgrediatur os meum. Capirare linguam, and capiftrare fermonem, are metaphors frequently ufed by Arabic writers.

Lingua mea fylus לשוני עט סופר מהיר .2 .Palm xlv

fcriba velocis-Mr. V. tranflates periti. The Arabic verb

fignifies acutus ingenio, folers fuit, in re exercitatus fuit. In this tranflation, we would obferve, our Author is fupported by the authority of the Chaldee Paraphraft, and of the Syriac and Arabic verfions. The expreffion of the English tranflators, either by accident or defign, is ambiguous, and will fairly admit of either of thefe interpretations, My tongue is the pen of a ready

writer.

We are next prefented with five catalogues of words in the European languages, that are derived, or at leaft fuppofed to be derived, from the Arabic or Perfic. The firft fhews the affinity of the Latin to thefe two languages; the fecond, that of the Italian; the third, that of the Spanish, and Portuguefe; the fourth, that of the English; and the fifth, that of the French.

On Etymology in general we fhall deliver our fentiments as concifely as poffible, fo far at leaft as they are in any degree connected either with the defign or execution of Mr. Vieyra's work. We scarcely know any character that requires a more rare affemblage of extraordinary qualifications, than that of a fkilful Etymologift. A writer of this defcription will find ample fcope for the exercife of the moft penetrating fagacity and deliberate judgment, even if he confines his researches within the bounds of his vernacular tongue. The difficulty of tracing English words to roots, which though of English growth, have long fince become obfolete, or are preferved only in the provincial dialects of the rude and illiterate, has led too many into foreign countries in fearch of what could alone be found at home. It should be obferved also, that this difficulty is nece farily increased when the work is undertaken by a ftranger, who has fewer opportunities of acquainting himself with the provincial dialects, and who is lefs likely to be informed of the changes, which, originating at firft in the pronunciation of words, pafs gradually into their orthography. We may be permitted to fuggeft by the way, that the native etymology of every living language would be better underflood, if collections were made of fuch words as are peculiar to the vulgar in the several diftrics, and either published separately, or uniformly fubjoined at leaft to fuch topographical hiftories as have lately enriched the literature of our own country. But it is not to any fingle language that the labours of the Etymologift can well be confined, and in proportion as the fphere in which he acts is extended, his talk becomes more complicated and more arduous, For before

he

he ventures on foreign languages with a defign of tracing their connection with his own or with each other, he must be diftinguished by accomplishments far fuperior to thofe which commonly fall to the lot of the linguift. He must understand the hiftory of the country whofe language he propofes to illuftrate, the invafions it has undergone, and its connections with the neighbouring states. He will then have to examine the languages of thefe different nations, not only in their purity, but in their deflections and corruptions, whether they are the effect of time, and appear plainly in writers of different ages, or are to be traced only in the converfation of different ranks, and particularly in that of the commercial claffes, who, from the nature of their occupation, are most likely to communicate their phrafeology to the furrounding nations. To elucidate the etymology of technical and feientific words, he must be accurately verfed in the hiftory of the arts and sciences, in the order in which different nations received them from the firft inventors, and the improvements made at different æras, which have gradually introduced an acceffion of new words. In afcending to ancient languages he will often be ftopped by a language no longer known. In this cafe he can only fearch for fuch veftiges of it as commerce or conqueft may have introduced into languages now in being. Above all, he must know when the found is to be depended on, and when the sense. To afcertain the former with precifion, he ought to poffefs a kind of knowledge which in fome languages indeed cannot be obtained, the knowledge, we mean, of the ancient pronunciation. To afcertain the latter, he muft trace the various changes which words undergo by compofition, metaphorical acceptation, and tranfmiffion from one language to another, an employment of itfelf fufficiently perplexing, but which, like every part of this great undertaking, can never be entered on with fuccefs, without a philofophical acquaintance with the origin and progrefs of language in general, and long habits of cool analogical reafoning. For it behoves the fcholar, who would ferve the caufe of real learning, inftead of haftily acquiefcing even in his moft favourite conjectures, to fubmit them repeatedly to the impartial fcrutiny of reafon; to fee that they are fupported by hetter authority than mere fuppofitions, however numerous and plaufible; to take care that a derivation, which is barely poffible, be never preferred to another which has probability on its fide; and to guard against every derivation of the elements of a compound word from different languages, unlefs the foreign word which is fuppofed to enter into the compofition can be proved to have been previously naturalized.

Had thefe principles been more generally adopted by etymologifts, we fhould not have feen fo many wild and fanciful at

Sf 4

tempts

tempts to torture fenfe and language, and wreft every thing to the support of a beloved hypothefis. The world would indeed have loft the amufement of feeing the Gods and Heroes of Pagan mythology convérted, by an etymological metamorphofis, into Patriarchs at one time, into Celts + or Swedes at another, and under the hands of one daring adventurer, into a kind of allegorical orrery §. Whether the work of Mr. Vieyra be of this kind, or deferve rather to be claffed among those which elucidate the theory of language, and the philofophy of the human mind; which give precifion to definition, and, in fome inftances, perfpicuity to hiftory, is a question which the felection of a few examples may enable our readers to refolve.

From the Hebrew, or Arabic, 1 dies, and Deus, our Author tells us, is derived fumula, the name of a Lapponian idol, fignifying Deus dies, the inhabitants werfhipping, as a God, the returning day, after fo long and comfortless an abfence.

Hercules is derived by Mr. Vieyra from the Hebrew 718 quafi illuminans omnia. Hercules, he tells us, was the name of the fun among the Tyrians, and in fupport of his derivation quotes the following paffage from Macrobius, Sat. 1. 1. c. 20. Hercules quid aliud eft quam aëris gloria? Que porro eft aëris, nifi folis illuminatio?

حجا

The Latin cogito, and the Greek nyequal, he deduces from the Arabic — bodj, intellectus, ingenium. Tamefis, and Thames, from the Arabic tâma, domavit. Nates, from the Arabic a nautat, of the fame fignification, quia, scilicet, suspensæ ac pendulæ funt.' Bog, from the Arabic & bokat, locus depreffior ubi ftagnat aqua. Bog-houfe from the Perfian o

bagah, latrina. To duck, from the Arab.

dâc, depreffit, im

*See Cumberland's remarks on Sanchoniatho, Huet, and Fourmont. + Pezron fur les Celts. ↑ Rudbeck's Atlantica.

Hiftoire du Ciel, par M. Pluch. "I have heard," fays the learned Warburton, "of an old humourift, a great dealer in etymologies, who being vexed at the oppofition his difcoveries met with, broke out into much learned paffion, and with a large claffical oath affirmed, That he not only knew whence words came, but whither they were going. This was only thought an extravagance of an enraged etymologist in defpair. But I apprehend the old gentleman had wit in his anger, and foberly referred to his art of explaining antiquity. And indeed on any fyftem-maker's telling me his plot, I would undertake to fhew, whither all his old words were going: for in ftri&t propriety of fpeech they cannot be faid to be coming from, but going to fome old Hebrew root." Divine Legation, Book iv. Sect. 4.

mer.fit