gna §, No 11, Mar. 15, ’06.] 
But, if it gets rid of some false quantities, it 
still leaves many ; and it certainly introduces ad- 
ditional errors in the pronunciation of the vowels, 
which were already many enough. 
The custom of pronouncing Latin according to 
the sounds given to the letters by each particular 
nation, does not carry with it on the Continent the 
same inconvenience which attends that practice 
in English. In most, if not in all, the continental 
languages, each vowel has its own sound; some- 
times long, and sometimes short ; sometimes, as 
in Italian, open; and sometimes close, but always 
preserving a similarity of sound. 
But in English this is not the case. 
The same vowels vary, not merely in quantity, 
but in sound. Habit makes many of us uncon- 
scious of the difference ; but it is obvious to all, 
who have given any attention to the pronuncia- 
tion of foreign tongues, or who have acquired any 
practical knowledge of their pronunciation. 
We have every reason to believe, that the Latin 
vowels had uniform sounds; and that the same 
letter could only have a change of quantity, but 
could not, as with us, represent a different vowel 
or even a diphthong. 
It seems, therefore, obvious, that we cannot 
have a consistent utterance of Latin, so long as 
we preserve anything of our own peculiar pro- 
nunciation. 
It is not an easy thing to induce the whole body 
of English scholars to change their habit. Many, 
indeed most, have little or no knowledge of 
foreign speech, though many read French and 
German with ease, and a much smaller number 
Italian and Spanish. 
But it would be a great step towards making 
Latin a language of practical usefulness, if our 
Universities would adopt Milton’s view of the 
matter, and admit the Italian pronunciation. The 
schools cannot take the initiative: for they must 
prepare their youth for college lecture rooms. 
No one, who has ever heard Latin read or 
spoken by an Italian, or even by:a German, can 
doubt of the increased melody which results from 
a consistent pronunciation. 
At the time when Latin was still the usual 
mode of intercommunication between all literary 
men, this uniformity existed. An Italian lec- 
turer was understood at Oxford, as an English 
lecturer would have been at Padua; and a travel- 
ling scholar required but one language to find 
himself understood, wherever a man of letters was 
to be met with. There is now-no universal lan- 
guage. French is gradually giving way in some 
places to English, in others to German. English- 
men speak French as uniformly ill as Frenchmen 
speak Jenglish. Of course, there are here and 
ere remarkable exceptions; but not suflicient 
to invalidate my assertion as to the generality. 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
219 
men’s ears will be offended with novelties and in- 
consistencies in the English pronunciation of 
Latin. They arise from a vain attempt at cor- 
rectness in quantity, which cannot be attained 
except by a radical change in the whole system 
of pronunciation. E. C. H. 
ON MARRIAGE IN THE GREEK CHURCH. 
(2 S, i. 174.) 
This consists of two parts, the betrothal and 
the actual marriage. The betrothal takes place 
as follows : 
“The priest, remaining in the sacrarium, delivers to 
the persons to be betrothed, and who are standing with- 
out at the sacred doors, lighted candles into the hands of 
each, and then returns with them into the body of the 
church. Here, after prayers have been said, two rings 
are brought out, of gold and silver respectively, which 
had previously been placed upon the altar to be dedicated 
and consecrated, and the priest gives the gold ring to the 
man, the silver ring to the woman, repeating three times 
the form of words following : 
‘AbpaBwrigerar 6 SodAos ToD Ocod 6 Setva THY SovAnV TOD Ocod 
Tivde, eis TO Ovo“a TOU Llatpds, Kal TOU Yiov Kat Tov “Aylov 
Ilvevparos, viv Kal del Kal eis TOUS al@vas TOV aidvev. Aunv. 
‘The servant of God, JZ, espouses the handmaid of God, 
N., in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost, now and ever, and to endless ages. Amen.’ 
Then turning to the woman he thrice repeats the same 
form, mutatis mutandis : “ AppaBwvigerar 7 SovAy Tod Ocod, n 
Setva. k.7.A.? ‘The handmaid, W., of God espouses,’ &c. 
‘The rings are put on the right hand finger, and are taken 
off and interchanged by the bridegroom’s man, both 
in order that the woman may not take too deeply to 
heart her inferiority, which the less costly material of the 
ring seems to hint at, as also to confirm the mutual right 
and possession of property, either present or future, to 
each in common. 
“ After the betrothal the marriage follows immediately, 
if the bride and bridegroom please, only it must not on 
any account be private. The use of crowns, in celebrat- 
ing marriage, is most constantly observed to this day, 
insomuch that marriage is often called orefavwua, the 
crowning; and orépecGar and orepavotcar are synony- 
mous with yaueto@a, The crowns are made of olive- 
branches, surrounded with white threads interwoven with 
purple. The priest, putting one on the head of the man, 
says: 
© Sréperae 6 S00A0s Tod @cod, & Setva Thy SovAnv Tod cov 
tHvd_e yaper, eis Td Svo“a Tov Iarpds Kat ToD Ytod Kal Tov 
“Aytou Ivevmaros,’ 
‘The servant of God, MZ, is crowned; that is, marries 
the handmaid of God, W., in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ 
He then crowns the woman with the other, saying, 
*Sréherac 7 SodAq Tod @eod, x. 7. A.’ ‘The handmaid of God 
is crowned,’ &c. Then joining their right hands he blesses 
them three times, saying, ‘ Kipte 6 @cds judy, Sdfy Kat tesa 
orepdvwoov avtovs.’ ‘QO Lord our God, crown them with 
glory and honour.’ Then he hands them a cup to drink 
of, both as a mark of joy and unity, and a pledge of com- 
munity of possession.” - 
This account of the betrothal and marriage in 
the Greek Church is taken from Smith’s De 
So long as thiiys remain as they are, English- | Graecae Ecclesiae Hodierno Statu Epistola, pub- 
