Biscayan tongue; it is so totally dif ferent from Gaelic or Welsh either, that the most shallow* etymologist would feel at a loss to prove their identity. To begin with facts, Balbi gives sixteen words of the most common occurrence of the Basque, Gaëlic, and Welsh. Of these sixteen not one Basque word bears the least resemblance to the Gaëlic or Welsh; and even out of the ten numerals, which are also given, there is only one (the sixth) that has any sort of affinity. This is the more remarkable as the numerals, in almost all the languages of Europe, and a great many in Asia, have a considerable degree of affinity, how much so ever the languages may differ in other respects. The Basque is most probably all that remains of the language of the Acquitani of Cæsar's time. That these differed in every respect from the Celts and Belgic Gauls we have the most positive testimony from Strabo, who says (book iv. cap. 1), "that the Acquitani were altogether different, τελέως ἐξηλλαγμενους, from the others, not only in their language, but in their persons, resembling the Spaniards more than the Gauls; nor did the rest of the Gauls, who were similar as to personal appearance, speak the same language.' It is probable that Spain was peopled from Africa, and Acquitania from Spain; and the Basque may therefore search for its kindred among the ancient languages of Numidia and Mauritania, if still in existence. I think, if a Basque scholar were to examine the Punic scene in Plautus, he might prove more successful than our Hibernian O'Neachtans and other O's.

I have thus, Mr. Urban, endeavoured to fulfil the promise which I made to you at the beginning of this year. To have done justice to the task would have required much more space than your pages could afford, and more leisure and ability than are at my command. I trust, however, that these essays of mine, imperfect as they are, may induce abler hands to take up the subject, and pursue the path which I have so far followed. I am convinced that it is a safe route,

because I have had no favourite theory to support, nor have I indulged in any conjectures of my own imagination. It will be found that all my statements are merely natural inferences from certain observed phenomena or facts, or from the fair and unthwarted testimony of ancient writers. It may be asked, why do I disregard the opinions of so many of our modern writers? To this question my answer has been already given, "with reasons good." I have no regard for those moderns who pervert and degrade the science of etymology, so useful within its lawful sphere, and who misquote and misrepresent ancient authorities in support of some favourite theory. The writings of all such, being the result either of prejudice, ignorance, or insanity, are by no means entitled to that respect which we pay to those of Cæsar, Tacitus, and Strabo.

In conclusion, I may be allowed to say, that I feel cheered and highly gratified to find that my efforts have met with the approbation of Sir William Betham, whose remarks to that effect appeared in your Number for October. It will be seen that, in some of my letters, I had free recourse for assistance and confirmation of my views to Sir William's excellent work on the "Gaël and the Cymbri," in which it is clearly and fully proved that the Gaëlic and Welsh are very different languages. To this work I also referred Mr. Logan and the literati of Wales at large; but not a shadow of an argument have they been able to bring forward in its refutation. is true I differ from Sir William on some points in the first part of his work, particularly in making Ireland the cradle of the Celts. I should say, that in early times it was more natural that islands should be peopled from continents, and that the diffusion of mankind over the earth should have taken place by land rather than the reverse. For this reason I have inferred that the Celts came from the eastward by land, (from what precise part I do not presume to say,) first into Gaul, and thence into Britain and

It

Ireland. Had Ireland been peopled from Phoenicia direct, I cannot conceive it possible that there should be so very little affinity between the Celtic and Semitic languages, particularly as both have remained pure and unmixed for such a length of time.

Perhaps I am too fastidious in my ideas of the legitimate application of etymological science, which I still think has been allowed to run riot in the hands of some of our countrymen. I believe I can account for my taste in this respect from having been several years accustomed to a very rigorous etymological school, that of the Arabic. Nothing can be more satisfactory than the certainty with which every word of that language may be traced on fixed principles to a particular root, beyond which it is deemed absurd to proceed. The Arabic roots, too, consist generally of three syllables; and though the Oriental grammarians have the good sense to leave these undisturbed, yet our etymologists would mangle them without mercy. For instance, the word mukaddimatun, which signifies the first part of anything, is, on the most unerring principles, derived from kaduma, to go before; but an Arab would never dream of dissecting kadama into ceud-am (first time), like our Celtic derivators. Again, in all the words resulting from the root kadama (and they are many) the radical consonants k, d, and m, are never lost nor transposed on any account; and the same rigorous principle is applicable to all the other roots, which, in fact, is the grand characteristic of languages of the Semitic family. I mention this to excuse, if not to justify, the suspicion with which I receive all arguments founded on the etymological researches of my countrymen. If they show me a single principle on which their art is founded, I trust that I shall prove amenable to reason; as matters stand, I consider the whole as mere conjecture, of which there is ample proof in their own disagreement in the derivation of such words as Britain, Caledonia, Celtæ, &c.

Great praise is due to Sir William Betham for the light which he has

thrown on the most obscure portion of British history,-that of the Picts. That these were a Cymbric race there is every reason to conclude; still, I should say that those of them who escaped from Scotland were too small in number to form the basis of the present Cumraig. It will be borne in mind that the last struggle between the Scots and Picts was a war of extermination on the part of the former, and, according to the testimony of all the old historians, only a remnant of the Picts made their escape to England. These in all probability sought shelter, not among the Saxons, but amidst the mountains of Cumberland, which, as well as the whole western coast of the island, was then occupied by those Britons whom the Saxons had displaced. The expulsion of the Picts from Scotland took place near the middle of the ninth century, and it will be difficult to prove that the present Cumraig were not settled in Wales several centuries before that period. In fact, the poet Taliesin flourished about the middle of the sixth century, or, at all events, long before the era of Kenneth Macalpin. It seems to me, then, the more natural inference, that the Picts were really of the same race as the Britons or Cumraig of the South, and that on their defeat and expulsion by the Celts of Scotland, they easily coalesced with those of their own kindred, so that every trace of them, as a distinct people, was thenceforth lost.

But it is now high time for me to close this long letter, together with the Celtic controversy, on which I have nothing further to add, unless Mr. Logan should raise stronger objections against my views than any he has yet brought forward. I am well aware that this has been a subject on which opinions have greatly differed; and the only plea on which I claim any credit to my statements, consists in my not venturing (to the best of my judgment) beyond what may be established as facts, or such inferences as I deemed to be naturally deducible from facts.

Yours, &c. FIOR GHAEL.

And, again, in King Lear, act 1st, Edmund says,

"This is the excellent foppery of the world, that when we are sick in fortune (often the surfeit of our own behaviour), we make guilty of our disasters the Sun, Moon, and Stars; as if we were villains on necessity, fools by heavenly compulsion, knaves, thieves, and treacherous by spherical predominance; drunkards, liars, and adulterers by inforc'd obedience of planetary influence; and all that we are evil by a divine thrusting on."

Ward, in his Lives of the Gresham Professors, informs us, that the learned Mr. Gataker, desiring Mr. Henry Briggs, the first geometry professor of that college, to give him his opinion concerning judicial astrology; his answer was, "that he conceived it to be a mere system of groundless conceits." Some, however, beheld these men with admiration, and thought that an order of persons who were familiarly acquainted with the stars, and privy to the decrees of heaven, were in the highest degree respectable. Others, who looked upon their art as sorcery, regarded them with horror and detestation.

In the reign of James the First, letters patent were granted to the two Universities and the Stationers' Company, for an exclusive right of printing Almanacs, and under their patronage astrology flourished till beyond the middle of the last century; but in 1775, a blow was struck which

demolished this legal monopoly. One Thomas Carnan, a bookseller, had some years before detected or presumed the illegality of the exclusive

right, and invaded it accordingly. The

cause came before the Court of Comand was there decided against the mon Pleas in the above-named year, Company. In1779, Lord North brought a Bill into the House of Commons to renew and legalize the privilege; but, after an able speech by Erskine in favour of the public, the House rejected the measure by a majority of 45; but the Stationers' Company afterwards managed to regain the exclusive market, by purchasing the works of their competitors.

The absurdity and even indecency of some of these productions was fully exposed by Erskine; still the astrological and other predictions were continued: it is, however, some extenuation, that the public, long accustomed to predictions of the deaths of princes and falls of rain, refused to purchase such Almanacs as did not contain their favourite absurdities. It is said that the Stationers' Company once tried the experiment of partially reconciling Francis Moore and common sense, by no greater step than omitting the column of the moon's influence on the parts of the human body, and that most of the copies were returned upon their hands. The Company appear to have acted from a simple desire to give people that which would sell, whether astrological or not; and not from any peculiar turn for prophecy inherent in the Corporation. Thus they issued at the same period the usual predictions in one Almanac, and undisguised contempt of them in another, apparently to suit all tastes.

Almanacs were very early distinguished for the mixture of truth and falsehood which they contained, and at the present time, those which have the most extensive circulation are equally remarkable for a like mixture, interspersed with much that is useful. The most ancient are those of Partridge, Moore, and Poor Robin, which have survived their authors much more than a century, but continue to be published with their names.

The two former of these publications have professed, in the plainest

terms, to foretell the weather, even to a day, stating that on one day there will be rain, on another snow, and on a third thunder. They have also prophecied as to political events with nearly equal confidence, though not quite so distinctly. The latter, however, treats all such prognostications with becoming ridicule, but in some parts has shown but little regard to decency, and in others approached to utter obscenity. Mr. Granger observes, "There appeared in the reign of Charles II. an Almanac under the name of Poor Robin, a well-wisher to the Mathematics,' which has been continued for about a century. The author hit the taste of the common people, who were much delighted with a wit of their own level. This occasioned the publication of a book of jest under the same name, and in the same reign." Poor Robin died only a few years ago, at somewhat more than the hundred and seventieth year of his age. We happen to possess a few of the productions of his earlier days, in his twenty-sixth and two following years; some brief selections from these are subjoined, as specimens of the broad humour of those times. In the title-page he informs his readers that the work contains a twofold Kalendar; viz. "The Julian, English, or Old Account, and the Roundheads, Fanaticks, Paper-scull'd, or Maggotheaded New Account, with their several Saints'-days, and Observations upon every Month. Calculated for the Meridian of Mirth and Jollity, and fitted for the capacity of the meanest Noddles, that have but three grains of understanding."

He dedicates to his "Potent Patron the World," as follows:

"It is now grown customary to dedicate Almanacks, as well as other books; and indeed none more needs protection than they, considering the slanders that are cast upon them, and by none more than by them who understand them least. For this purpose, therefore, have I made choice of the World for Patron, knowing the whole world is better able to defend my Almanack than any one man whatsoever; but here was I at a loss what title or epithet I should bestow on it, seeing it alters its nature according to the persons that traffic in it: for with pipers, ballad-singers, and fidlers, it is a merry world; with prisoners, sick people, and GENT. MAG. VOL. XI.

moneyless-persons, it is a sad world; with a soldier it is a hard world; with a divine, a wicked world; with a lawyer, a contentious world; with a courtier, a slippery world; with most men, a mad world; and with all men, a bad world: and yet, bad as it is, you see I trust the world with my book; but it is only for one year; and if it speed not well, the next I will change my patron; till then I am your annual Star-gazer, P. R."

The Calendar contains the usual information, also observations and directions for the provision of good and suitable cheer for each season, &c. some few samples of which we have subjoined:

Jan. "Best physick now to give relieve, Is legs of pork, and chines of beef."

"There will be little of action amongst the soldiers, unless it be some few centinels blowing of their nails."

Feb. "Strawberries and honesty will be scarcer this month than frost and cold weather; yet green pease will be as plentiful as snow in dog-days."

Mar. "Graft warden pears and apple

trees,

For sparing flesh and bread and cheese."

Apr. "Now if we have no rain this month, it will increase the price of butter; and if we have nothing but rain, it will hinder the maids from playing at stool-ball on Easter holy-days.”

May. "Those who their healths love, this month will engage To rise betimes, and butter eat with sage; Drink scurvy-grass-ale, and clarified [day." And walk in the fields in the cool of the

whey,

June. "Now toasting-irons and warming-pans

Are not so used as pots and cans."

July. "When cherries in the month of
March,

As ripe are as in June,
And men instead of corn sow starch,

And bears do sing in tune,
Then bailiffs they will honest prove,

And horse-coursers refuse to cheat.
Then drunkards shall no liquor love,

And gluttons will refuse to eat."

Sept. 1690. Husbandry. (Each month in the year contains similar directions.) "Pick hops before that they be brown; The weather fair, no dew on ground. Set slips of flowers and strawberries, Gather your saffron e'er sunrise, Sow wheat and rye, remove young trees, Make verjuice now, and kill your bees, G