IM THI ROMANS U« JlMERICJL 



If 10 short an interval has produced a transformation so bold in a wiittei 

 langvago, what might we look for in one spoken only ? 



But, an interval of three times five hundred years has passed since th« 

 Romans and the Sioux held intercourse with each other, and we yet find 

 the general structure of the two languages strikingly similar, and several 

 of their words identical in meaning and pronunciation ! And, though th« 

 latter observation fails in some cases, even this, so far from proving any- 

 thing averse to the pusition before assumed, serves to strengthen it. 



The word 'pater, for instance, pronounced alike in both lanjruages, dif- 

 fers in signification ; being used in the one to imply father, in the oiner 

 fire. This apparent discrepancy of meaning may be explained in a few 

 words. The Sioux are accust;Dmed to venerate the sun as one of the more 

 especial manifestations of the Divine Essence, who is regarded as the 

 FATHER or creator of all things; and it, being the great source of light 

 and heat, is naturally looked upon as an immense body of fire. Thus, in 

 the course of ages, the term became perverted in its meaning and applica- 

 tion, and, instead of being used to express the sun, or Great Spirit, the 

 fatlier of all, it now only implies tlie simple element of fire, an emanation 

 from the sun. 



So in relation to the Latin word tepor, warinih, and the Sioux word tepe, 

 a lodge. The lodge is employed in winter to retain tlie heat witliin itself, 

 and exclude the cold air; nor is it wonderful that, in the progress of years, 

 the term tepor, or tepe, should become the only one by wiiich a lodge is 

 known. 



The word mena, is also pronounced tlie same in both, though different in 

 its signification ; meaning, in Latin, a narrow sharp fish, and, in Sioux, R 

 knife. In explanation of tliis, I would barely refer to the similarity of 

 shape between a knife and a narrow sharp fish. 



The relationship disclosed between tJiese two languages is seemingly 

 too close and significant to be attributed to n\ere chance or accident, and 

 can be in no other way satisfactorily accounted for, tlian by admitting the 

 correctness of tlie premises before quoted. 



But this position, curious as it may seem to some readers, and impreg- 

 nable as it must doubtless prove, has otlier weapons to protect it at com- 

 mand ; and, ere dismissing the subject, I will briffly notice some of them. 



It is by no means a conjecture of recent origin, tliat the ancient Romans 

 did actually colonize portions of the American continent. The industri- 

 ous researches of antiquarians have long since brought to light many items 

 which prove and strengthen it, tliough none of them so tangible and obvi- 

 ous as those previously noticed. 



Several obscure hints of the existence of extensive Roman colonies 

 planted westward of the Pillars of Hercules, (doubtless alluding to the 

 American continent,) liave been detected in the writings of ancient authors 

 yet extant ; but still further proof is afiiirdod in the relics of temples, cities, 

 roais, and fortified camps, long since discovered in Peru, JVIexico, and the 

 United States, wJiicli strongly savor of Roman origin. 



The ancient works at Marietta, Ohio, have been regarded, by not a few, 

 as the oftspring of Roman industry and military science, — and various other 

 remains, tliat signalize tlie Mississippi valley, point quite plainly to this 

 ■fMion for a pareutajfe. But a proof, still more conclusive than any ,yet ad- 



