ON ETHNOLOGY. 
259 
philology, which could have led either towards physiological or philological 
aUcoveries cooeerning the tribes and languages of mankind. 
The mighty genius of Bacon was indeed aware of the importance and 
mysterions nature of language. Tlie first chapter of the sixth book ‘ De 
iugmentis Sclentiarum,' contains ample, proofs of both. lie there enume¬ 
rates antong the dtaiderata, as a jmrtion of the doctriiip De Organ© Ser- 
iDonw, a treatise, ‘Dc Notis Kerum,* by which he means a philosophical 
catalogue of real signs {cUarueieres rtults) correspontling with the number 
of rsdtea/ words, —and also a philosophical graumiar (Grammuticam Phi- 
jwphMtem). There is enough for centuries in both timse problems, 
ioere is also much of wisilom implied in bis general invaluable principles 
of indaction and analogy; and it is to be regretted that thrse genns have 
Dot hitherto been fully developed. But Bacon himself did nothing towards 
tMt object with respect to language. He neither dcvelui«-d the principles 
of g^mar nor of the formation of words; still less did he attempt a classi- 
hcMiou of languages, or try to establish a method of inquiry into their nature 
tod origin. 
heibnitz is both the author of the compamtivo philosophy of language, 
ddq the first sncccsaful classifier of the lai)guag('s then known. Ills principal 
object in the foundation of the Academy of Sciences at Berlin was, as his 
iDcmoir of I 710 proves, to ensure the progress of this philosophy and classi- 
ratmn of iMguages, and hereby to trace the genealogy of mankind. His 
nrem designatio niedilationam de originibus gentium, duotis potK-^imum 
M mdicit) linguarum*,’ awl his letter to Tenzelf, form an epoch iu the 
atoiy of our science. We may call the j-peculatioDs, divination-s and dis- 
covenes of LeibniU in this respect prophetic, as one of the most illustrious 
of Europe, now amongst ua^, in Ida last scientific report, has 
Mlled Kant’s speculations and suggestions published about the middle of the 
century (1735), as to the system of the celestial bodies, with reference 
W the astronomical discoveries which u<iom our age. 
iiie great philosopher of Kbnigsberg himself, in laying the foundations 
D nis speculative philosophy of the mind, entered also into the nature of 
®"Ruage and the definition of a race, aud occupied hiinHi-if with the method 
*Da importance of a comparative amilysis of languages, partly in his philoso- 
p ical works, partly in Ids preface to a Lithuaidaii grammar. About the 
tuu^ Albrecht Haller at Guttingi-u founded modern physiology, with 
jWi special application to the races of mankind .sulweqijently developed by 
nmetibach. John Harris (1751), in Ids * I lennes,' a book full of ingenious 
"•zoning aud of learning, laid the foundution of grammatical philosophy. 
Horne Tooke, his acute opponent, developed, amongst 
oubttul speculative tlieories, some very pregnant views rijspecting the origin 
innexioDs, suffixes, and formative words; a most important point for the 
mparative analysis of languages. Horne TookcV researches in this re- 
ht etjualled for ingenuity only by tliosc of Bilderdyk, the 
«chpoet and essayist, on the origin of the tlirec grammatical genders. 
^ none of these tiiree writers entered into the general subject of the clas- 
cation and comparison of languages. Nor iloea the elementary treatise of 
r great Sylyestre de Sacy on universal grammar approach this problem. 
^ in thu first year* of the ninetoentb century, that Adelung’s 
‘I'tnndates’ (completed by Vater in 1817) began to lay before the world 
D”. B. p. 180 teg. First imblidjed in MisceU. Berolin. 
+ r Gnhrauer, Leibnitz. U. u. I29V 
t Cabrsuer. i. 1. ^ 
* rafessor Struve of Pultowa in his ‘Rapport» M. le Comte Oavaroff,’ 1847. 
s 2 
