1840.] from Bactrian and Indo- Scythian coifis, 629 



This supposition may^ I think, be proved correct. 



Let us first of all dismiss any consideration of the Semitic 

 origin of both alphabets, and look to the reference they have one 

 to another. If in the one, the system of vowels be of Indian 

 origin, and in the other original (and peculiar to the language,) 

 as above supposed, there can be no point of comparison. But 

 with regard to the diphthong 6, it is worth remarking, that ^, 6, 

 has the form t^ on later coins, but slightly differing from 0;?, and 

 hence it would appear as if the Zen die alphabet had borrowed 

 this 6 from the alphabet on the coins. This, however, does not 

 hold good with e. 



By comparing the consonants, we find resemblances perhaps 

 only between r and w, (not v, of the Zend alphabet), and n, in 

 which, however, the similarity is very obvious, though we in fact 

 are comparing two extreme points only, viz. the characters on 

 the coins in th^ir most ancient form, and the Zendic character 

 of wholly modern manuscripts. With other letters we only 

 require a common medium of comparison to ascertain their rela- 

 tion, as for instance with m, dh, and others. 



I do not propose to carry this comparison further, which to 

 afford satisfactory evidence, would require us to obtain in the first 

 instance the characters of the coins in their latest shapes ; and 

 would also necessitate us to point out in the Zendic alphabet, 

 what characters were subjected to a change of shape, to which the 

 nasals are especially liable. Lastly, it would not be sufficient to 

 confine our comparison to these two alphabets ; all other alpha- 

 bets must be similarly considered, which in a geographical 

 and historical point of view are included in the same circle as 

 these, viz. the Pehlvi characters of the books of the Parsees, so 

 intimately connected with the Zendic character, as well as the 

 various characters of the Sassanian monuments. All of them 

 are closely connected, first, in a geographical point of view, as 

 they are the native tongues in the countries west of the Indus, 

 and east of the Euphrates, viz., in Iran, probably so called ; and 

 secondly, in an historical point of view, as they came into lise in 

 the period intervening between Alexander the Great and the 

 invasion of the Mahomedans. 



Without at all deciding on the time' when the Zendic 



