1837.] Similarity of Greek and Sanskrit letters. 391 



hypothesis ; since the connection of the Greek with the Phoenician and 

 Samaritan alphabets, has been admitted as a strong evidence that 

 *' the use of letters travelled progressively from Chaldea to Phoenicia 

 and thence along the coasts of the Mediterranean* :" and the Greek 

 language is now so indisputably proved to be but a branch of the 

 Sanskrit stem, that it is not likely it should have separated from its 

 parent without carrying away some germs of the art of writing, 

 already perhaps brought to perfection by the followers of Brahma. 

 But my arguments are not those of books, or learning, or even tradition, 

 but solely of graphic similitude, and ocular evidence. 



The Greek letters are dressed by a line at the foot, in most cases, as 

 A, a, A, M, n, T, &c. ; — the Devanagri are made even along the upper sur- 

 face of the letters, and in later ages a straight line has been introduced 

 at the top, from which the grammatic elements are suspended. The 

 Greek alphabet is devoid of all system and has had additions made 

 to it at various times. Some of these, as <*> X, ¥, n, are precisely those 

 which present the least resemblance to the Sanskrit forms. 



I have placed my evidence at the bottom of plate XXIV. taking 

 my Greek type from the well-formed letters on coins, and from the 

 boustrophedon tablet of Sigeum. 



Of the vowels, A, I, o, and T, present a striking conformity with the 

 vowels ^H, T, and the semivowels "q" and "q of the oldest Sanskrit 

 alphabets inverted. The vowel E is unconformable, and resembles 

 more the short e of the Zend. The long H is a later introduction and 

 appears to be merely the iteration of the short vowel I, as « is of OO. 



In the consonants, we find b> r, a, z, ©, K, a, h, n, n, P, 2, t, i n fact 

 every one of the letters, excepting those of after invention, are repre- 

 sented with considerable exactness by the "^ (or double ^0, 31, t%, ^r, 

 *f, «F, ^r, 3T, T,TT, T., «T, IT of the oldest Sanskrit alphabet, although 

 there is hardly a shadow of resemblance between any pair in their 

 modern forms. The same precision cannot be expected in every case; 

 the B> A, 0, A, M, N, n, P, T, require, like the vowels, to be viewed in an 

 inverted position : the r, and 2, remain unturned : the z, and k re. 

 quire to be partially turned.— The A and the N may be deemed 

 a little far-fetched ; the b taken from the double v, and the a from 

 the aspirated ^ may also be objected to; but taking a compre- 

 hensive view of the whole, it seems to me impossible that so con- 

 stant and so close a conformity of the alphabetical symbols of two 

 distant nations should exist without affording demonstration of a 

 common origin. Whether the priority is to be conceded to the Greeks, 



* Pantographia, page 107. 

 3 e 2 



