ON ETHNOGRAPHICAL PHILOLOGY. 
157 
Hence all that is got is the language, and the name of it. The locality must 
be obtained by other means. Something of this sort, also, occurs in other 
languages; but in none to the extent that it prevails in‘the African. Whilst 
Africa is little visited, African slaves are spread far and wide. Seetzen’s 
vocabularies were collected at Cairo, OlUenclorps in the West Indies, and 
Mrs. Kilham's at Sierra Leone. 
Keverting, however, to the consideration of the priticiplea of classification 
which were applied to the African languages in 1812 and 1817, and to those 
that have since been adopted, we find that the only important systematic work 
which has appeared since the Jlithridales an«l the Atlas is that of Dr. Pri¬ 
chard. Herein the classification is, aa far as concerns tlic extent of its divi¬ 
sions, in kind the same as Adclting's and Balbi’s; in other words great care 
b taken lest the generalization outstrip the data, and no groups are ultcnipted 
ei|uivaleiit to those recognised in the philology both of Europe and of Asia, 
furtbemiove, Dr. Pricliard's classification is an arrangement of nwti not of 
bagu^es; so that his divisions and subdivisions arc formed, as stated before, 
on mixed characters. Nevertlieless, his work contains a much wider classifi- 
caiioQ than those above-montioned ; new affinities, <Jetcrnilncd upon even the 
principles of the Mithridates and Atlas, having sine*; been discovered; in 
several cases by the author himself. The mtist important of these are the 
connesioD between the Caffre languages and tho languages of tlte kingdom 
ol Congo, the extension given to the GaJla and Nubian groups, and the ex- 
pn^ition of the Semitic affinities of the Berber. These will be mentioned 
again in their proper places. At present they simjily serve as illustrations. 
Jo IbH, the present writer laid before tlie British Association at York, a 
00 the Elkno^apki/ oj'Africa fu determined bt/its tang-mijes. Here 
the classification, the provisional character of which was decidedly stated, 
was as follows 
I. The Coptic class, containing the extinct dialects of Egypt. 
II. The Berber class, containing the no»-Arabic languages of northern 
Africa. 
11b The Hottentot class. 
IV. The Caffre class, extending from the limits of the Hottentot country 
as tarijortbward asLoango and the River Juba west and east. 
y. The fifth and last class, which was left unnamed, fell into eleven sub- 
owinate groups:— 
!• The Nubian group. 
2- The Galla group. 
3- The Borgho group. 
^ Tlic Beghariui group. 
5. The Burnu group. 
S* The JIaudara group. 
, ^ groups the ten first were 
allowing subdivisions:— 
7. The Howssa group. 
8. The IMandingo group. 
9. The Woloff group. 
10. The I'ulah group. 
11. Tile Ibo-Ashantee group. 
undivided: whilst the eleventh fell into 
n. The Fantee division. 
^ The Acra division, 
y- The Dahomey division, 
p^^^^'llistanding these sub-divish 
5. The Ibo division, 
c. The Nufii division, 
f. The Y'arriba division, 
the following languages remained un- 
1. The Agow dialects. 4 . The Scrcres. 
-• Ihe Bisbarye dialects. 5 . The Akvambu. 
3- IheScrawoolli. 6, xhe Kru. 
Itt determining upon this classification the writer did his best to define the 
