1865.] 137 ILesley. 



Mr. Lesley read a communication "On the Mythical Com- 

 pounds of BAR," stating in substance the conclusions to 

 which a study of the subject for nearly twenty years had led 

 him, in the form pf theses, which he did not purpose now to 

 discuss at any length. 



1. That the word bar (with its isomorph bal), and its mythical 

 simple compounds b-bar, t-bar, k-bar (with their isomorphs), and 

 BAR-B, BAR-T, BAR-K (with their isomorphs), and other more com- 

 plex compounds, partly mythical and partly vulgar, constitute the 

 staple of that part of all language which was produced by and de- 

 voted to the use of the primfEval (and mediaeval) religionism of the 

 human race. 



2. That the word BAR was constructed and used to signify the 

 trinity; not the personal triune deity of Athanasian Christianity, but 

 the aboriginal and universal, druidic or arkite trinity, composed of 

 three material objects, the ship, the mouvtain, and the water. 



3. That the analogies which are observed by comparative philolo- 

 gists to exist between diiferent languages, so far as concerns their 

 vocabularies — analogies, considered by one class as organic, and, 

 therefore, not necessarily congeneric, by a second class as accidental, 

 and by a third class as proofs positive of a common origin — are in 

 fact, and in the main, ercleai.astu-al; and constitute a distinct depart- 

 ment of comparative philology, viz., the mythical, initiative, mystic, 

 druidic, or arkite; purely invented, and propagated by a priestcraft, 

 which penetrated, in course of ages, all nations. 



4. That the organico-onomatopoeic portion of language is suscepti- 

 ble of analysis and explanation on a few simple principles, involving, 

 however, a reference to mysterious instincts. While the grammatico- 

 organic portion is much more obscure as to its origin, although also 

 subject to scientific classification. 



5. That both the arkite or cabalistic portion of language, and the 

 organic or spontaneous portion, are to be kept carefully separated, in 

 comparative philology, from a third portion and the largest of all, 

 consisting of the debris of the other two; being at once sedimen- 

 tary, metamorphic, and pseudomorphic. 



6. That it is by no means certain that the so-called monosyllabic 

 languages have not reached that condition by a process of contrac- 

 tion, obviously going on in languages now spoken, like the French. 



7. That a comparison of the most widely variant types of lan- 



VOL. X. T 



