1847.]

Median Language.

693

the diphthongs au, ai, etc.); no derivative vowels, e, o. In the consonants we find three series, viz. Surds mute and aspirated, and Sonant mute.

Surd, {asp.

Sonant,

k

mute

d, Z, j, bgo

sh, chh, kh

The aspirated sonants v, dh, etc. of the Sanscrit, some of which are also found in the Zend, are wanting in the old Persian, which in this respect forms the transition to the Greek and Gothic.

"Declensions.-The remains of the old Persian are sufficient to show that in the time of the Achæmenides it possessed nearly the whole stock of inflexions belonging to the Asian languages. Still it is inferior in completeness to the Sanscrit and even to the Zend, and manifests a tendency to confound the Cases by rejecting certain final articulations as t and n, and also s after a and a. The Dual also seems to have vanished, at least in the verb. Of the eight cases of the Sanscrit and Zend, the Locative is the only one not yet found in a separate form, the Instrumental appearing to be used instead of it. The name of the Deity, Ormuzd, occurs in the following forms:

"

Other pronouns exhibit

Conjugations. From the nature of the inscriptions which consist in great measure of titles and proper names, the forms of verbs are not exhibited in such fulness as those of the nouns. Still examples are preserved of the Present, Imperfect, Aorist, Perfect and Future; besides the Indicative mode, the Imperative occurs in the Middle voice, whereas the other forms are in the Active. Only one example is found of the Optative, which mode is usually re-placed by forms of the Imperfect. The Imperfect tense of the verb to do will serve as a specimen of conjugation:

"Lassen considers that the old Persian was the language of the ancient Persians in the time of the Achæmenides, the Zend of the east of Persia, whence its close affinities to the language of India; and that both the old Persian and Zend descend from a common source. The Pehlevi shows itself as a living language only during the times of the Sassanides. It was the language of western Iran, and consists of two elements, an Iranian and an Aramean. It is the first monument that appears after the old Persian, and serves in many respects to show the mode of tran sition of the ancient language into the modern. It is already modern Persian in its essential characteristics. The Pâzend was a dialect parallel with the Pehlevi, but which attaches itself im mediately to the Zend."

We return, in conclusion, to the point of similarity in character in the nations, who speak the Indo-European languages.

"God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant." So spake the voice of the Almighty by his servant Noah, upwards of four thousand years ago by Ararat. Comparative philology affords us another beautiful illustration of this passage. The testimony of the great German scholars is unequivocal that the Indo-European langua ges are by far the most powerful in the world, the natural language of the ruling race. Their mode of development from their own substance, and the manner in which they lay the strong hand upon everything in other tongues which suits their own genius, shows the spirit of the conquering and annexing race. How wonderful the law by which the speakers of Indo-European tongues, the Japhetan race are everywhere victorious! Commencing from the mountains of Caucasus they fill the best parts of the world. In India the Brahmans, the speakers of Sanscrit, have impressed their religion and language upon a hundred millions, whose gov ernment is Anglo-Saxon, Japhet dwelling in the tents of Shem. Northern Asia and Northern Europe are ruled by the Sclavonic family proven by Bopp to be of the race of Japhet. Shem yields everywhere, except always in Arabia where Ishmael lives before God invincible in answer to the prayer of Abraham, his friend. But mark where Japhet, meets Japhet in his own fastnesses!

1847.]

Extension of the Japhetan Race.

695

Proud England and proud Russia know the names of Affghanistan and Circassia! The Grecian Alexander of the Thracian family of Japhet overran Asia, and the empire of Japhetan Rome was enlarged till it became universal. The unconquered seakings of Scandinavia carried Sanscrit forms along the coasts of the frozen North, and the Gothic tribes filled Central Europe with another form of the same speech. The Vandal, the Frank and the Celt bear witness of their race in their language. And last, not least, the Anglo-Saxons are the very essence of the race, the most essentially Japhetan of all Japhet's family. And the English language, which (harmony and copiousness apart) for pure strength, may be called the noblest mode of human speech, is stretching its conquering wing from India to California.

May we not look into the vista of the dim future with two ideas struggling within us? In pursuing the study of language we may carry the torch lighted by Teutonic genius into one twilight cavern after another, and so classify tongues by some high analysis, as to teach not so much, laboriously one, or two languages, as the principles of all. And, again, may we not, as is obscurely hinted by one of the Germans, by this inductive process look to the bringing of mankind so near together in the understanding of their respective modes of speech, and in the investigation of what in language lies nearest to nature, as that a nearer approximation may be made to an universal language? The arts are bringing mankind into near physical connection, the prevalence of a pure Christianity will bring them into moral union; might we hope to bring together the elements of speech into the light of philosophy, so that this great jargon of conflicting tongues may give way to finer combinations, and we speak not with the tongues of men but of angels?

ARTICLE IV.

ZUMPT'S LATIN GRAMMAR.

A Grammar of the Latin Language, by C. G. Zumpt, Ph. D., Professor in the University, and Member of the Royal Academy of Berlin. From the ninth edition of the original, adapted to the use of English students by Leonhard Schmitz, Ph. D., late of the University of Bonn. London, 1845.

By Charles Siedhof, Ph. D., late Rector of the Gymnasium at Aurich, in the Kingdom of Hanover, now teacher of a private Classical School, Newton Centre, Ms.-[Concluded from p. 435.]

§ 622. It is here said that contingit mihi is frequently used with the infinitive. This is true in general, but not in regard to Cicero, who had but once used this construction, viz. in the passage quoted from pro Arch. III. Stürenburg, therefore, endeavored to correct the reading. Cf. his Latin edition, p. 45-50, and his first edition of de Officiis, preface, p. 9, 10. Yet he has returned in the German edition of the oration to the authority of the manu scripts. Also Lambinus thought the construction not classical. Although it is common with poets and later writers yet it is not used by any good prose writer.

§ 623. Our author has in § 600 explained the regular construction of necesse est; thus necesse should here either be stricken out, or at least it should be said, that it, as being very rare, is not to be imitated.

In the passages with verisimile est, ut, it is to be observed, that in all of them non is added. Further are two of a hypothetical nature, as the imperfect tenses, by which it is followed, show.

625. The subjunctive after necesse est (and oportet) is not to be put in the same category with the accusative and infinitive, unless with some restrictions; for although the present follows those phrases, yet the imperfect is entirely against the use of Cicero. Necesse est me facere and necesse est faciam are both equally good, but necesse erat facerem is not good Latin; we must always say in this me facere.

But the expression mihi necesse est with the infinitive, so frequent with Cicero, ought to have been quoted. Cf. ad Famm. II. 16. 2 mihi necesse est esse; de Fat. IX: homini necesse est mori.

1847.]

Remarks on Zumpt's Syntax.

697

§ 626. The difference between quod and the accusative before the infinitive is particularly clear in Cic. pro Sext. XXXVIII. 80: An haec ipsa vis est non posse emori? an illa, quod Tribunus plebis templum cruentavit? an, quod, quum esset ablatus, primumque resipisset, non se referri jussit? The first sentence expresses a general thought, both the following refer to a certain person and event.

§ 629. There are still other different constructions which often occur, of which we only mention si and cur after miror and mirum est (as the Greek vavμálo ei). Cf. Cic. pro Sext. I. 1: miretur potius, si quem-viderit (in the beginning of the chapter there is: si quis mirabatur, quid esset, quod —); de Senect. XI. 35: quid mirum igitur in senibus, si infirmi sunt. Further, de Orat. II. 13; pro Rosc. Amer. XLV. 131; ibid. VIII. 22; Cic. ad Famm. VII. 27. 1: miror, cur me accuses. Si is especially frequent with Cicero.

§ 632. It is a very true remark of Klotz in Jahn's NN. GG. für Phil. und Pädag. 14. Jahrg. 4 Band. 3 Heft. p. 243, 258 (Review of Krebs's Antibarbarus), that according to the use of Cicero the perfect participles of the deponents, when used passively, have regularly the perfect participle of an active verb with them. This remark would be in place in a school grammar.

§ 635. Rem. In the phrase, domum reversus, litteras tuas inveni, reversus should be stricken out as in the highest degree rare in writers of authority. It is only found in Caesar de B. G. VI. 42, and with Cic. Phil. VI. 4. 10: ut retractus, non reversus videretur. By this is our author's remark § 209 at the end, that although reversus is often used as a participle it rarely occurs with esse, corrected; for reversus is here not a mere participle, because esse is omitted. Very instructive is Cic. ad Famm. VL 6. 11: ut in eam civitatem boni viri et boni cives, nulla ignominia notati, non revertantur, in quam tot nefariorum scelerum condemnati reverterunt.

§ 639. The use of the future participle active without esse is very properly ascribed to the Silver age, yet the participle of esse, futurus, should have been excepted; it is so frequent with Cicero that there is no need of reference to passages.

§ 647. This use of the ablative absolute is to be found in a few passages as early as with Cicero. Cf. Acadd. II. 11. 33: Quo enim omnia judicantur, sublato, reliqua se negant tollere; de Finn. II. 27. 85: Perfecto et concluso, neque virtutibus neque amicitiis usquam locum esse, nihil praeterea est magno opere dicendum; de Officc. II. 12. 41: Adjuncto vero, ut iidem etiam prudentes