200 Rev. Epwarp Hincxs on the Number, Names, and Powers 
tive or surname, “the Lioness ;”’ she being represented as a lioness, or as a woman 
with the head of a lioness. The goddess of Bubastis (see fig. 89) was represented 
asa cat, or as cat-headed. It remains to be ascertained whether any of the words 
commencing with the cerasteso r its equivalents have Indo-germanic affinities. 
Now I think it obvious that the German wohn-en, A S, wun-ian, to dwell, is 
etymologically connected with feN-TI, as Ch. Bunsen writes the word (fig. 150) 
a dweller. The two first letters of this word I consider radical, the two last affor- 
matives. In conformity with the principles laid down in the preceding part, this 
affinity leads me to affix the value V to the initial character in this word ; but 
that character is a nose, and the name of a nose is hieroglyphically written with 
the cerastes (fig. 151), Sharpe E. I. 77. 3; a sure proof that this peculiar letter 
had the same value. 
In the Turin copy of the Todtenbuch, the cerastes is actually used for the 
quail, c. 149. 13, 14, 25; a corrupt mode of writing, I admit, but one which 
could not have been introduced if these characters had not belonged to the same 
class. Again, the /itwws, or a character not distinguishable from it, is used for 
the affix of the 3 p.s. m. Ch. Gr. pp. 260, 278, 279. All these considerations 
lead me to the conclusion, that the cerastes was equivalent to the quail and its 
homophones, in their consonantal value, at least. I, therefore, place it in the 
alphabet as U 5; u 5. 
28. The hand has been considered by all previous writers as the equivalent 
of the semicircle ; and I acquiesce in this, placing it as T. 4; t. 4; yet I am by 
no means sure that I am right in so doing. It seems clear, indeed, that they are 
both represented in the same manner in Coptic words, and that both have the 
same class of Indo-germanic equivalents. If, then, they differ, it is not as T and D, 
or TH, but as T and the strengthened sound which the Hebrews represented 
by 0. ‘This could only be proved by Hebrew transcriptions; and apart from 
these it could only be disproved by clear instances of the interchange of the hand 
with the semicircle, or its undoubted homophones. 
As to the former of these points, there is only the transcription IV. 10, in 
which 0 occurs, and it is there represented by the hand; while in the many in- 
stances in which F occurs, it is always represented by the purse, T 3, or by T 1, 
or T 2. This is certainly calculated to raise a doubt as to the equivalence of the 
hand and these letters. If the Egyptian equivalents of 5 im the name of 
