to other Branches of Knowledge. 321 



probably throw light on the most ancient relations between 

 Asia and Africa. We may expect to find in them the his- 

 tory of those queens of Ethiopia who reigned successively 

 under the name of Candace, known to the generals of Au- 

 gustus CflDsar, and one of whom is mentioned by St Luke the 

 Evangelist. 



I shall only refer to another set of inscriptions deciphered 

 within a few years in several of the ancient Italic languages, 

 by means of which we have gained some knowledge of the 

 languages spoken in Italy before the ascendancy of Rome. 

 They have afforded an ethnological result, which is also of 

 some importance in relation to classical history. It seems 

 from them that the old Italic nations, the Latins, the Um- 

 brians, the Opici or Oscans, the Ausonians, the Siculians, 

 the Samnites and Sabines, all the old Italic nations except 

 the Tuscans, were not, as the older writers, Freret, Larcher, 

 and even as Niebuhr supposed, partly Celtic or other bar- 

 baric tribes, and partly Greeks, or at least Pelasgi, but a 

 distinct and particular branch of the Indo-European family 

 of nations, and that they all spoke dialects of one language, 

 which may be termed the old Italic, and of which Latin is 

 but one variety. 



The most important aids to historical researches into the 

 origin and affinity of nations is undoubtedly the analytical com- 

 parison of languages. This may be considered as almost a new 

 department of knowledge, since, although long ago sketched 

 out, and followed to a certain extent, it has been wonderfully 

 augmented in recent times, and it is only in its later deve- 

 lopment that it comes to have any important relations with 

 ethnology. Leibnitz is considered to have been its origina- 

 tor. The Adelungs, Vater, Klaproth, Bopp, Frederick Schle- 

 gel, and Jacob Grimm, have been among its most successful 

 cultivators ; and lastly, to William von Humboldt it owes its 

 greatest extension and the character of a profound philoso- 

 phical investigation. But it is not, in this point of view that 

 I contemplate the results of philological researches. It is 

 as an auxiliary to history, and as serving in many instances 

 to extend, combine, and confirm historical evidence, that the 

 comparison of languages contributes to the advancement of 



