[ 43 1 ] 
characters of which it was originally compofed. Of 
thofe, however, exhibited by the tranfcripts only the 
laft of the firft line and the laft of the infcription. 
feem to have deviated from their primitive forms.. 
The laft character of the firft line I can by no means 
take for He, as M. l’Abbe Barthelemy fuppofes it to. 
be, fince it fcarce bears a remote refemblance even, 
to his pretended new form of that element. Befides, 
M. l’Abbe has in effeCt given up this new form, by 
allowing that on the coins of Menae it may be taken 
for Mem. Nor can l'uch an uncouth proper name 
as n.ONJONH, tharaame, with three Alephs in it, 
and two together in the middle of it, I believe, be 
found in the whole circle of Hebrew, Syriac, or 
Phoenician antiquity. I fhould therefore rather 
call it 'Thau, one form of which it greatly refembles, 
if part of the curve behind be confidered as an ac- 
cidental addition ; which might eafily have been 
made, in the courfe of fo many ages. With regard 
to. the laft letter of the infcription, this feems to be 
purely adventitious, and of a recent date. For Dr., 
Porter’s accurate copy of this infcription, taken upon 
the fpot, which the late Rev. George Drake, M. A., 
and Fellow of Balliol College, received of Charles 
Gray, Efq; Member of Parliament for Colchefter, 
and gave to the Univerfity of Oxford, exhibits a. 
character refembling the modern form of Schin , 
though made in a very bungling irregular manner.. 
In fhort it preients to our view not the lead appearance 
of antiquity. Nay, it feems to have been formed 
upon the ruins of a Nun , the upper part or which 
is plainly vifible in this character. 1 would there- 
fore. with the permiftion of the critics, read toe 
* ' A 1 A 
