A-. 
 
 
 \ 
 
 A^ 
 
 — 
 
 \ 
 
 — 
 
 . 
 
 
 = 
 
 =^ ~ 
 
 
 u = 
 
 
 
 5 ^ 
 
 
 
 3^ 
 
 — - 
 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 5 
 
 V4-; 

 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 y:no\ :< *•» «;* ■; ■ ' '■■■■■• 
 
 '..^f'.,-"Wt.-'„'.-n..''i-. ■!"i,'r' ■;■. 

 
 TWO PAPEKS 
 
 ON 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD 
 
 ANASAKET 
 
 BY 
 
 LIONEL HORTON-SMITH, M.A. 
 
 OF LINCOLN'S INN, BABEISTER-AT-LAW, 
 MCMAHON LAW STUDENT AND LATE SCHOLAR OF 
 
 ST. John's college, Cambridge 
 
 V 
 
 LONDON 
 
 D. NUTT, 270-271 STRAND 
 1897
 
 THE OSCAN WORD 
 ANASAKET
 
 TWO PAPERS 
 
 ON 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD 
 
 ANASAKET 
 
 BY 
 
 LIONEL HORTON-SMITH, M.A. 
 
 OF Lincoln's inn, babrister-at-law, 
 
 MCMAHON law STUDENT AND LATE SCHOLAR OF 
 ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 I ' » 
 
 LONDON 
 
 D. NUTT, 270-271 STRAND 
 
 1897
 
 KiCHARD Clay and Sons, Limited, 
 
 LONDON AND BUNGAY. 
 
 c c c 
 
 c 
 
 < c
 
 
 PEEFACE 
 
 The present publication, as is indicated by the title, consists 
 of two Papers on the Oscan word ANASAKET. The First is, 
 practically speaking, a reprint from The Classical Review of 
 May 1894 ; while the Second, an answer to the criticisms of 
 Prof, R, Seymour Conway in the succeeding October number of 
 the same Review, was read before the Cambridge Philological 
 Society on May 23, 1895. 
 
 It might perhaps have seemed unnecessary to reprint the 
 First Paper, inasmuch as it had already been published in a 
 Journal so generally accessible as The Classical Review. As, 
 hoAvever, it appeared that greater convenience of reference 
 would be secured, if the Second Paper (now for the first time 
 printed at length) were immediately preceded by a reprint of 
 the earlier Paper, the writer is much indebted to both the 
 Editor and the Publisher of The Classical Rcvieiv for their 
 kindness in enabling him to carry into effect the plan which 
 thus so forcibly commended itself. 
 
 He would also take this opportunity of thanking Prof. 
 Michel Brcal, Membre de I'lnstitut de France, Prof. Franz
 
 vi PREFACE 
 
 Biiclioler, Jdint-Etlitor (\Yitli Dr. Otto Ribbock) of the liheinis- 
 ches Museum, Prof. Johannes Zvetaieff, Author of the Sylloge 
 Inscriptionum Oscarum, and Professors E. Kuhn and Joliannes 
 Schmidt, Joint-Editors of Kuhn's Zeitsehrift, for their courtesy 
 in sanctioning the reproduction of the four facsimilgs to be 
 found in the present work. 
 
 Nor finally should he forget to offer his best thanks also to 
 Mr. A. W. B. Welford of Lincoln's Inn (formerly Scholar of 
 Emmanuel College, Cambridge), who very kindly undertook 
 the task of reading through the early pi-oofs of the whole 
 work. 
 
 Lest the devotion of two papers to the consideration of a 
 single word should appear to any as a useless expenditure 
 of time and labour, the writer may be pardoned for appealing, 
 in conclusion, to the time-honoured judgment of Plato (Thcaet. 
 p. 187 E) :— 
 
 KpecTTOu yap irov afiiKpov ev y ttoXv fxr) iKavoiq irepavai. 
 
 The Common Room, 
 
 Lincoln's Inn, VV.C. 
 Sept. 23, 1896.
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 TWO PAPERS ON 
 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The First Paper 1 
 
 The Second Paper — 
 
 (1) Brief Outline 19 
 
 (2) Abstract 21 
 
 (3) Full Text 25 
 
 Addenda 67 
 
 Index '75 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTEATIONS 
 
 Two Facsimiles of the ANASAKET Inscription facing 4 
 
 Two Facsimiles of the SESTIES Inscription ,, 8 
 
 Map to Illustrate the Second Paper, §§ 4, 7 „ 44
 
 THE FIKST PAPER 
 
 OK 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD 
 ANASAKET
 
 ABBREVIATIONS. 
 
 The following is a list of the Abbreviations used throughout the present 
 ■work: — A. J. P. = 'American Journal of Philology^ ; G.P.S.T. = Cambridge 
 Philologicnl Society's Transactions; C.R. = 'Classical Revieiv' ; K.Z. = 
 ' K'lhn's Zfitxrhrijl' : J. Zvetaieff .9. /. 0. = ' Sylloge Inscrij:)i.ionum, Oscanim' 
 (1878); J. Zvetaieff 7.7.7. Z). = ' Inscriptiones Italiae Inferioris Dialecticae' 
 (1886); C.I.C. = 'Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum\: A. Fabretti C.I.I. = 
 'Corpus Inscriptionum Italicarum' (1858-1867); C.I.L. = 'Corpus Inscrip- 
 tionum Latinarum.'
 
 THE OSCAN WOED 
 
 ANA SAKE T 
 
 FIRST PAPER. 
 
 Reprinted from The Classical Review, vol. viii. pp. 198- 
 
 201 {May 1894), hy the courtesy and hind permission of loth 
 
 the Editor and the Publisher.^ 
 
 T3>iASAMA: >mniA^ 
 :)3I>3S3/AAM: ^IA3n) 
 
 This inscription ^ on a bronze helmet ^ belonging to the 
 * Bruttiornm Agar ^ (facsimiles of which are given in the 
 Rheinisches Museum, vol. xxxix., 1884, p. 558, Mem. de la Soc. de 
 Ling, de Paris, vol. vi., part i., 1885, p. 51, Zvetaieff, I.T.I.D., 
 1886, No. 247, pp. 75, 76 and reproduced by permission in the 
 
 1 ' Addenda et Corrigenda ' find their place i!i this ' First Paper,' as now 
 reprinted. In each of the two cases where they are of special importance 
 (namely p. 6, nn. 2 and 3) attention is drawn to the point by a footnote 
 commencing "A^.S." 
 
 - Of date not earlier than the 2nd century b. c. [according to R. von Planta, 
 Gramm. der Osh-Umbr. Dial., vol. i. (1892) 1893, pp. 30, 31]. 
 
 3 Presex'ved in the ' Antikenkabinet ' at Vienna (see F. Biicheler in Rhein. 
 Mtis., vol. xxxix., 1884, p. 558, and J. Zvetaieft', I.I.I. D., 1886, No. 247, 
 p. 76). 
 
 ^ See Zvetaieff, I.I.I.D., pp. 74-76, and Prof. R. S. Conway in C.PS.T., 
 vol. iii., part iv., 1892, p. 22.3. 
 
 B 2
 
 4 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 present work ^) has been a source of great difficulty to students 
 of the Italic dialects. 
 
 F. Blicheler in lihcin. Miis., ih. (1884) p. 559, denying that 
 the S " in T3>IASAI/1A is a letter, reads SatTrti/? ava ukct \ 
 S7re8i9 Mafi€peKi.e<;, and translates ' Saepina praeda ; egit Spe- 
 dius Mamercius ' ' Saepine spoil — Spedius Mamercius won it,' 
 In this view he is followed by W. Deecke, who, in his Appendix 
 to Zvetaieff I.I.ID. (1886), p. 184, writes: "Die Inschrift im 
 Bhein. Mus. xxxix. 558 ist zu lesen — spedis : mamerekies : | sai- 
 pins : ana aket ; d.i. Spedius Mamercius Saepinus dedicavit. ana- 
 ist Praeposition, dhet Pft. von ahum = agere." ^ 
 
 M. Breal, on the other hand, in Mdm. de la Soc. dc Ling. 
 de Paris, I.e. (1885), reads STreBif; MafjuepeKLef Xaiirivi ava- 
 auKer, and translates ' Spedius Mamercius Saepinas consecravit ' 
 ' Spedius Mamercius of Saepinum made this offering,' Breal's 
 transliteration of the inscriptional letters by avacraKer has 
 generally been considered correct, and is followed by C. D. Buck, 
 Dcr VocalisiiULS der OsJcischen Siorachc, 1892, pp. 14, 15, 17, 79, 
 G. Bronisch, Die OsJcischen i- und e- Vocalc, 1892, § 62, p. 149, 
 § 78, p. 176, and R. von Planta, Grammatik der Oskisch- 
 Umhrischen DialeUc, vol. i. (1892) 1893, pp. 257, 299, 518, 564.* 
 
 Prof, R. S. Conway is the exponent of a totally different and 
 novel view : — While regarding the S as a genuine letter, he 
 transliterates it by/.' In a paper on ' Veseris and the letter F ' 
 (C.P.S.T. vol, iii. part iv. 1892, pp. 222 sqq.), a paper written 
 
 ^ See the opposite page, and the page facing p. 8. 
 
 - The letter S ^'^'^^ ^^^ times inadvertently printed C" in this first paper, 
 as printed in C.l\. viii. pp. 198-201. 
 
 ' C. D. Buck, Der Vocalismu-s der Oskischen Sprache, 1892, p. 17, does not 
 believe that even Biicheler himself would now venture to maintain this view. 
 Vid. infra p. 10 ; cf. also p. 7, n. 1. 
 
 •» Also, apparently, by Zvetaietf, I.I.I.D., 1886, (Olossarium), p. 92.
 
 THE ANASAKET INSCRIPTION 
 
 Of the two photographs shewn hereunder, A represents the 
 facsimile given by Prof. Michel Br^al in the M4m. de la Soc. de 
 Ling, de Paris, vol. vi. part i. 1885, p. 51 ; while B represents 
 that given by Prof. Franz Biicheler in the Rhein. Mus. vol. 
 xxxix. 1884, p. 558. 
 
 A. 
 
 v^ 3 1 >| 3 'j 3 Mi AA J^I A^n^ 
 
 ' Bord inferieur rlu casque ' (M. Br^al). 
 
 B. 
 
 T 3^ A$AvAAS^rj ^^1 
 
 y 
 
 For the information of any who may wish to know the exact 
 height of the letters and length of the lines in the inscription, 
 it may be well to quote here the following measurements given 
 by Prof. Biicheler, I.e. : " Zeile 1 hat eine Liinge von 9^, 
 Z 2 von 11 cm, der hochste der Buchstaben t eine Hohe von 
 
 cm. 
 
 [To face p. 4
 
 FIRST PAPER 5 
 
 with the object of discussing the " altogetlier exceptional repre- 
 sentation of the same sound by v in Latin and / in Oscan," 
 Prof. Conway mentions " a set of Oscan coins with the legend 
 ^evaep and fensernum" which, following F. Imhoof-Blumer 
 [" Hyria-Veseris (Fenserner) in Kampanien," Numismatische 
 Zcitschrifty, Vienna, vol. xviii., 1886, pp. 206 sqq,'\, he assigns to 
 the town Veseris. Imhoof-Blumer had been unable to give 
 any other example of the sign ^ used to transliterate Osc. /. 
 But Prof. Conway boldl}'' quotes our Bruttian-Oscan inscription 
 (viz. Zvetaieff I.I.I. D., No. 247, pp. 75 sq.) and also the one im- 
 mediately preceding it in Zvetaieff (viz. I.I.I.D., No. 246, p. 75), 
 as containing the same letter ^ reversed ^ (adding that in these 
 two inscriptions cr is the ordinary Ionic ^).^ 
 
 The latter inscription (No. 246), which, like the former 
 (No. 247), occurs on a bronze helmet ^ belonging to the ' Brut- 
 tiorum Ager,'* is Tpe/St? S. ^eare<; SeSer (sic Zvetaieff I.e.), 
 wherein Prof. Conway (ib. p. 223) transliterates by "festes = 
 Fcstus." In the former he explains T3>IASAHA as " -faKer in 
 composition = Osc. *fefaced (fcfacust) Umbr. *faced (f a k u s t) ;" 
 and inasmuch as he compares Umbr. klavlaf aanfehtaf 
 (Tab. Ig. ii. a. 33), which he suggests " may possibly mean ' the 
 dedicated chine,'" it is apparent that (although he does not 
 actually translate the inscription), he would explain his postu- 
 lated *avafaKer as meaning ' (he) dedicated.' 
 
 Sestes, the usual transliteration of )3T)3S, the reading hitherto 
 given in the inscription above quoted, is generally understood 
 
 1 A view to which he still adhei^es in C.R. vol. vii. pp. 468, 469, Dec. 189.3. 
 
 " On this alleged use of a symbol ^, however, to represent Osc. / in Greek 
 writing, see the ' Second Paper ' § 4, infra pp. 41 --igq. 
 
 ^ Preserved in the Public Museum at Palermo (see Biicheler in Rhein. Mus. 
 vol. xxxix., p. 559, and Zvetaieff, I.I.I.D., No. 246, p. 75). 
 
 * See Zvetaieff, I.I.I.D.,^^. 74, 75, and Prof. Conway in C.P.S.T., vol. iii., 
 part iv., p. 223.
 
 6 THE OSCAN AVORD ANASAKET 
 
 us = ' Sestius' or ' Scxtins' (cf. e.g. W. Corssen in ICZ., 
 vol. xxii., 1874, p. 803, ZvetaiefF I.I.I.D. Glossarium, p. 151, 
 K. Brugmann Grundr. d. Vcrgl. Grccmm. d. Idg. 8])r., Eng. 
 Ed., vol. ii. § 81, p. 246, vol. iii. § 170, p. 17, Buck, Dcr Voc. 
 der OsL Spr., p. 81) ; but against tins explanation of such a form 
 as Sestes stands the fact that on Oscan inscriptions written in the 
 Greek alphabet the Idg. suffix -io-s is represented by -i?, and 
 the Idg. suffix -lio-s by -ie? (see G. Bronisch, o'p. cit., § 41, pjj. 
 77 sgq.). Hence a form Sestes, occurring on an Oscan inscrip- 
 tion written in the Greek alphabet, could represent neither Idg. 
 -io-s nor Idg. -uo-s, and could not therefore be understood as = 
 ' Sestius Sextms.' Consequently we must suppose such a form 
 as Sestes to represent ' Sestus ' or ' Scxtus,' ^ which we not un- 
 frequently find in Latin inscriptions as a cognomen as well as 
 a praenomen, e.g. L. Tertinins Sextus {G.I.L. xii. 1948 and 
 2021), Lie. Sextus {G.I.L. xii. 2300), and Sex. Vireius Sextus, 
 where it is both praenomen and cognomen {G.I.L. xii. 2391). 
 The letters preceding {i.e. written on the right-hand side of) 
 )3B3S2 j^re ^^ia3ST,=^ so that we have )3T^3S))ia3ST. 
 
 1 For the st = xt, cf. Umbr. sestentasiaru = Lat. ' sextantariarum.^ 
 See Brugniaim, Grundriss, Eng. Ed., vol. ii. § 81, p. 246, vol. iii. § 170, p. 17. 
 Cf. also Osc. d e s t r s t ' dextra est,' Umbr. destrame ' in dextram ' ; and note 
 that the same phenomenon occurs also in some of the Greek dialects (v. J. 
 and T. Baunack, J)ie Insrhrift ron Gortyn, 1885, pp. 23, 24). 
 
 2 X.B. — The true reading of the end of this word turns out now to be not 
 J 3 T~J as hitherto believed bj' those who have discussed or given facsimiles of 
 the inscription (e.g. A. Fabretti C.I.I. 1858-1867, No. 2890 his, W. Corssen in 
 K.Z., vol. xxii. 1874, p. 300, ZvetaiefF .?. 7.0. 1878, Pars Prior, p. 83, Pars 
 Posterior, Taf. xviii. No. 13 6, Biicheler in Rhein. Mus., vol. xxxix. 1884, p. 559, 
 Zvetaieff /./././). 1886, No. 246, p. 75, L. Duvau in Me7n. de la Soc. dt Ling, 
 de Paris, vol. vi. part 3, 1887, p. 228, Brugmann Grundr., vols. ii. 1888, § 81, 
 p. 246 E.E., and iii. 1890, § 170, p. 17 E.E., Buck, Der Voc. der OsL Spr. 
 1892, p. 81, Bronisch, Die OsL i- und e- Vocale, 1892, § 30, pp. 58, 59, R. von 
 Planta, Gramm. der OsL-Umhr. Dialekfe, vol. i. (1892) 1893, p. 518, Prof. 
 C(mway in C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 223, andinC'.i.\ vol. vii. 1893, p. 
 469), but ^31 T- (vouchetl for by R. von Planta in C.R. vol. viii. 1894, p.
 
 FIRST PAPER 7" 
 
 Biicheler in Rhein. Mtcs. xxxix. p. 559, holding that the S of 
 ^3T^3S (as also the S of T3>IASAI/1A, v. supra, p. 4) is no letter 
 at all/ is forced to regard the I, which stands between >3T^3S and 
 
 348, n. 2, in reliance on whose authority I have inserted the | in the 
 facsimile of the inscription given by Corssen in K.Z. xxii. 1874, p. 300 A, 
 and in the photograph given hy ZvetaietF, S.I.O., Pars Posterior, Tab. xviii. 
 No. 136, as reproduced by permission in the present work ; see facing p. 8). 
 It has however seemed best to leave ^3TJ3S ™^ ^^^^ '^^^ o^ this '■first 
 paper,' because at the time of its publication in G.R. vol. viii. no. 5, May 
 1894, ^3T^3S '^^■'^^^^ (^^ j*^^'^*^ pointed out) generally regarded as the correct 
 reading of the inscription. 
 
 ^ N.B. — This particular paragraph has undergone modification in this re- 
 printed form, in view of the fact that the correct reading is ^ ^| Q 3 S T (see the 
 facsimile and photograph mentioned in the preceding note and the repro- 
 ductions thereof facing p. 8) ;— not ^^9 3 ST (^^ erroneously stated in 
 G.R. p. 199, on the authority of L. Duvaii in Mdm. de la Soc. de Ling, de 
 Paris, vol. vi. part 3, 1887, p. 228, who professed to give there the inscrip- 
 tion transcribed " d'apres la fac-simile de M. Zvetaieff," namely the 
 photograph just referred to. See Zvetaieff, S.I.O., Pars Prior I.e. and Pars 
 Posterior I.e. Unfortunately, at the time when I was writing my paper 
 for the G.R., May, 1894, I was unaware of Corssen's facsimile, and was 
 unable to obtain a view of ZvetaiefFs photograph, and consequently had to 
 rely on Duvau's transcription, which is now seen to have been incorrect. ) 
 
 Dr. von Planta, who has personally examined the inscription itself, has in a 
 recent letter assured me of the absolute correctness of the above-mentioned 
 facsimile and photograph in all respects save one, viz. the incorrect absence of 
 I between the T and 3 of ^3IT^3S to which reference has been made in 
 the preceding note. Thus the inscription, correctly transcribed, runs 
 T3A3A^3IT)3S)^I83ST' TreUs S Sesties dedei, = ' Trebius 8. 
 Sestius dedit.' 
 
 The transcription ^3T^ 3S>^ 8 3S T, given by Fabretti C.I.I. 2890 bis 
 —(given also by Corssen, in K.Z. xxii. p. 300 B., as the spurious reading on the 
 second helmet preserved in the museum of Palermo)— which might perhaps 
 have meant ' Trebius Gavius Sestus,' is, it should be mentioned in passing, 
 thus shown to be incorrect. 
 
 1 Scholars should be warned that Duvau in Mem. de la Soc. de Ling, de 
 Pans, vol. vi. part 3, 1887, p. 228, has misunderstood and therefore misrepre- 
 sented Biicheler's view concerning the S of ^3T^3S. Biicheler's view as 
 given in Rhein. Mus., I.e., is correctly given above in the text. Whether 
 Bucheler would still maintain the view in question is of course quite another 
 matter. Probably he would not, if Buck is right in believing that Bucheler 
 would no longer maintain his similar view concerning the S ^^ T3)IASAHA 
 (vid. supra p. 4, n. 3, and infra p. 10).
 
 8 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 )I83*^T, as the initial letter of the former. Thus he holds that 
 >3T^3S))ia3ST stands simply for >3T)3-^^ia3ST, which 
 according to him represents ^3T)3^ )ia3ST. Bnt this ex- 
 planation is extremely unlikely, and is rightly rejected by 
 Prof. Conway I.e. The most probable solution of this difficulty 
 is that the I between )3T^3S '^"^^ )ia3ST is the initial letter 
 of the name of the man's father, and represents Sexti /. (as ex- 
 plained by Corssen in K.Z. xxii. 1874, pp. 302, 303, Zvetaieff >S./.a 
 1878, Pars Prior, p. 83, and by Prof. Conway in C.RS.T. I.e., p. 
 223, note 1), and it is quite possible that the engraver was led to 
 write S instead of t at the beginning of the word Sestes, in order 
 to avoid the ambiguity which would have been caused by the 
 close proximity of so many ^'s and 3's in )3T)3^^^ia3*^T. 
 
 In this latter inscription Prof. Conway's own explanation of 
 )3T^3S by *Festes 'Festus' does not seem necessa7y, for Festus 
 has not the advantage of being so common a name as Sestus 
 Sextus 1 ; nor is it likely, for, if the engraver had here intended 
 to write the (to say the least of it) very uncommon three-stroke 
 symbol ^ for / [as in ^ENIEP above {if indeed the symbol ^ 
 in this latter word means f'^)"] written retrograde, as Prof. 
 Conway suggests, it is strange that it is so inexactly formed, 
 considering how accurately ^ is cut in this inscription each 
 time that it occurs.^ 
 
 Nor can I agree with Prof. Conway's explanation of 
 T3>IASAHA as *anafciket. It is true that facere is often used in 
 
 1 In view of the fact that the correct reading is not }3T)3S' ^"t. ^3IT^3S 
 (see p. 6, nn. 2 and 3), the question now is no longer whether we muet 
 transliterate the word by Sestes 'Sestus' or by Festes 'Festus,' but whether 
 we must transliterate it by Sesties 'Sestius, Sextius ' or by i^es<ies ' Festius. ' 
 On this question see the Second Paper, § 6, pp. 56 .sg., infra. 
 
 '^ On this doubtful point see infra the Second Pajier, § 4, pp. 41-45. 
 
 ' See further infra the Second Paper, § 4, pp. 41 sqq.
 
 THE SESTIES INSCRIPTION 
 
 Of the two photographs shewn hereunder — save for the inser- 
 tion of the I between the T J^ntl 3 of >3IT^3S vouched for by 
 Dr. Eobert von Planta (vid. supra p. 6, nn. 2 and 3) — A repre- 
 sents the facsimile given by W. Corssen in Kuhn's Zcitschrift, 
 vol, xxii. (1874), p. 800 A, while B represents the photograph 
 given by Prof. Johannes Zvetaiefif in his Sylloge Inscriptionuin 
 Oscarum (1878), Pars Posterior, Tab. xviii. No. 13 &. 
 
 A. 
 
 It should be mentioned that permission to rectify the fore- 
 going photographs by the insertion of the hitherto wrongly 
 omitted | of )3IT^3S was very kindly granted both by Prof. 
 Zvetaieff and also by Professors E. Kuhn and Johannes Schmidt 
 (Joint-Editors of Kulms Zeitschrift). 
 
 {To face p. 8
 
 FIRST PAPER 9 
 
 Latin with the meaning ' sacrifice ' (cf. Greek pi^eiv) ; but, in 
 so far as I am aware, this only applies to facio uncompounded ; 
 facio in composition does not, I think, possess this meaning. 
 Whether we regard Umbr. aanfehtaf (quotedabove, p. 5), with 
 Blicheler, Umhrica, 1883, p. 202, as = Lat. ' infectas ' (by which 
 Prof. Conway, in C.P.S.T., I.e., p. 228, note 3, supposes Biicheler to 
 mean ' raw or half-raw chine '), or, with Prof. Conway, I.e., as 
 from the preposition mi-, it does not seem possible to extract 
 the meaning ' dedicated ' from it.^ We frequently find, it is true, 
 on old, especially sepulchral, Latin inscriptions the letter F or 
 FC = ' fecit,' ' faciendum curavit ' — but there it only means 
 ' A. made or eonstructcd (not ' dedicated ') this tomb.' We do 
 not, I think, find facio used in inscriptions with the meaning 
 ' dedicate an offering.' To express this latter meaning Ave find 
 instead, e.g. do, loorto {C.I.L. i. 191), voveo, dico {C.I.L. i. 807), 
 dedico {C.I.L. i. 541), &c.^ In short, so far as I have been able 
 to discover, the meaning ' to dedicate ' is not found in any 
 form of the Idg. ^Jdhe- in Latin votive inscriptions, nor do 
 the writers Vl^q, facio in composition with this meaning.^ 
 
 Hence, as it is hardly likely that the verb in our inscription 
 can have any other meaniug than ' dedicated (the helmet),' and 
 as it is improbable that fac-, either compounded or uncom- 
 pounded, can have that meaning, and as moreover the ' graphic ' 
 argument given above on >3T^3S ^ holds good for T3>IASAMA 
 also, we must endeavour to find some other explanation. 
 
 Buck discusses the word avaaatcer in his Voc. der Osk. Spr., 
 
 ' On Umbr. aanfehtaf see further infra the Second Paper, § 6, p. 54, 
 n. 3. 
 
 " Similarly in Oscan we find d e d e d SeSer ' dedit,' d a d i k a 1 1 e d ' dedi- 
 cavit,' diiunated ' donavit.' 
 
 ^ See further infra the Second Paper, § 6, pp. 53-56. * Supra p. 8.
 
 10 THE 08CAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 (1S92), pp. 14, 15, 17, 79. On p. 14 (and cf. also p. 65) he classes 
 it with Lat. an-helv, Osc. an-getuzct ' proposuerint, iusserint,'" 
 Unibr. aii-tentu 'intendito' &c., Gk. Atl. avd, Boeot., Arcad. 
 av. On p, 15 he remarks " Auffallend ist das scheinbar nicht- 
 apokopierte ana in avaa-uKer, tails es richtig interpretiei't 
 worden ist. Dlirfen wir vielleicht an griech. Einfluss denken ? " 
 On jj. 17, he refers the word to a verbal a-stem *sahd- (cf. 
 sakahiter ' sanciatur'). He agrees with Jules Martha (as 
 quoted by Breal in M6m. dc la Soc. de Ling, dc Paris, vol. vi. 
 part 1, 1885, p. 52) that Bllcheler {Bhein. Mus., vol. xxxix., 1884, 
 pp. 558 s([}) is wrong to doubt that S is a genuine letter;^ 
 and adds further : " Ich glaube nicht, dass Biicheler selbst noch 
 an seiner Erkliirung festhalt, die ja in mehr als einem Punkte 
 anfechtbar ist."^ 
 
 I venture to think that Buck is on the right track, when he 
 says " Diirfen, wir vielleicht an griech. Einfluss denken ? " I 
 would suggest that avaaaKer was a borrowed ivord, and repre- 
 sents the Greek word avidrjKe, so common in Greek votive inscriio- 
 tions, ivith the meaning ' dedicated an offering.' The meaning 
 would thus be much the same as Breal's ' consecravit,' but it 
 is reached by a different way. That it should be a borrowed 
 word need not surprise us ; there are others, borrowed by Oscan 
 both from Greek and Latin. The latter need not concern us 
 
 ^ Vid. p. 4 (and also p. 7) ■■^npra. 
 
 ^ In Buck's opinion {ih. p. 17) ii "nicht unniijgliche" explanation of 3 
 (whereas elsewhere in the inscription we have ^) for s is tliat offered (not b} 
 Ha vet, as erroneously stated by Prof. Conway in G.P.S.T., I.e. p. 223, but) 
 by Louis Duvau in Mem. de la Soc. de Ling, de Pants, vol. vi., part 3, 1887, 
 p. 227. It is there suggested to read the S ^^ a c. Cf. also Brugmann, 
 Ci'rundriss, vol. iv. 1892, § 867, 5, where, classing avaaaKfr under thematic aorists 
 of his class ii. , he writes ' ' Osk. a n a s a k e d oder a n a :: a k e d ' consecravit ■ 
 (Duvau) zu Lat. nanciO." The suggestion, however, has little to commend it, 
 and is rightly rejected by Prof. Conway, /. r. 
 
 ^ Cf. pp. 4, n. 3, and 7, n. 1.
 
 FIRST PAPER 11 
 
 here. From the former Buck {o}^ cit., p. 10) quotes : E v k 1 1'l i : 
 Ey/cXe?79, H c r u k i n a i : 'EpvKivr], k ii i n i k s : ')(olvi^, Aa- 
 7rovt<i : AafjbTrcovio^, "rroTepe/u, : Troryjp, S a n t i a : Biavdia^,^ and 
 some others. 
 
 The south of Italy was studded with Greek colonies, chiefly- 
 Achaean and Dorian, and the non-Greeks in Southern Italy- 
 were constantly coming into contact with Greek life, manners, 
 and language — a contact which was furthered by the importance 
 of the powerful and flourishing city of Tarentum (a Laconian 
 colony) to Greeks and non-Greeks alike. Accordingly we may 
 expect not only to find Achaean and Doric characteristics in 
 the lano-uasfe of the Greek colonies themselves, but also to find 
 them reflected even in the dialects of the non -Greek peoples 
 in this part of Italy. Perhaps of all inscriptions those com- 
 memorating votive offerings are the most common, and 
 of all the words which occur on these inscriptions dveOy^Ke 
 is probably the most frequent. May it not then be pos- 
 sible, or even probable that the non-Greek inhabitants in 
 Southern Italy may have borrowed the word dvedrjKe from 
 the Greek inhabitants, in the sense of 'dedicating' an 
 offering ? 
 
 Let us now examine avaa-aKer and see how it can have come 
 
 from dve6r)K€.^ 
 
 That 6 was changed to s by the Laconians is a fact noticed 
 
 1 Concerning Osc. S a n t i a (an inscription which has been assigned to Nola, 
 see Zvetaieff, I.I.I. D., No. 228, note) see further the Second Pajnr, § 7 infra, 
 pp. 61 ad fin. — 63. 
 
 2 The tentative suggestion offered in C.B. vol. viii. p. 200, namely that the 
 disputed letter in our inscription might conceivably be ©—a suggestion 
 which could not in any case apply to Sestes (or rather Sestie>i, as it ought now 
 correctly to be read, see above p. 6, nn. 2 and 3)— should, I think, be retracted 
 altogether as inapplicable also to the word T3>IASAI/1A, the actual form of 
 whose disputed letter is held now to be certainly S. "ot ©.
 
 12 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 by Grammarians of all ages : e.g. Apoll. dc Synt, p. 89, 3, 
 ol fiev ciWot Ao)pc€i<; rr/povai to 6, AdKcove<; Se Kal et? a 
 fi€Ta^u\Xovaiv. It is perhaps liardly necessary to multiply 
 examples. A few will suffice — e.g., val to aiw, the famous 
 Laconian oath (preserved in Aristophanes Lysistr. 174, Peace 214, 
 and Xenophon Hell. iv. 4, 10); with which compare Thucydides 
 V. 77, where, in the Laconian decree, tw crtw crv/j,aTo<; = tov 
 6eov OvfiuToq. An instance from Alcman 72 [24] (Bergk) 
 has particular application here : " "npa<; S' ea-TjKe rpet? " ' and 
 he made three seasons,' where B has eauKe, for in this passage 
 we Dot only have the actual word which we are seeking (for 
 the verb cf. also Aristoph. Lysistr. 1081), but we also find it 
 spelt with a for tj. Another interesting example is a-eioq uvijp, 
 the Laconian formula of praise cited by Aristotle, JSih. vii., 1, § 3. 
 -P. Cauer, Delectus Inscriptionum Gracccimm'^ (1883), p. 15, No, 
 83, a Laconian inscription found at Taenarum, furnishes us 
 with some good inscriptional instances : Xrjpavhplha (line 2) for 
 %rjpavhplha, S'jjptTTTro'i (line 23) for SrjpLTnro'i, SiTro/iTro? (line 
 24) for ©607ro/Lt7ro9, probably coming through the form 6io- for 
 Oeo-, — i/<:\^9 (line 27) for @eoK\rj<;, and 'AX/cicroi'Sa? (line 38) for 
 W\Kt6otBa^, TOV alv <^epwv (line 51) i.e. tov 6tov (pepayv ("idem 
 in titulo simili Foitcart apud Le Bas, Voy. Arch, ii, n. 163 d. 
 vocatur (Tio(f)6po<;," Cauer, I.e.). Compare also Miillensiefen, De 
 Titulorum Lacooiicorum Dialecto, (1882) § 2, part iv. no 59, p. 31, 
 and § 8 p. 57, where the form avea-tjKe { = ave6r)Ke) is cited from 
 an archaising inscription of the second century A.D. ( = Cauer, 
 op. cit., no. 34, p. 16).^ 
 
 Inasmuch as this Laconian change was comparatively late on 
 
 ' This change of 6 to .s seems to liave been peculiar to the Laconians, and 
 not to have been common to the other Dorians ; the traces of it in Crete are 
 " snspectissima " (Ahrens, De Dialecto Dorica, § 7, p. 69).
 
 FIRST PAPER 13 
 
 inscriptions, objectors might possibly attempt to argue that 
 where we find this Laconian s ( = 6) in the MSS. of Alcman, 
 Aristophanes, Thucydides, &c., it is probably due to archaising 
 grammarians, incorrectly assigning to the time of these authors 
 a later pronunciation of the Laconian 0. But in face of all the 
 evidence this view seems hardly likely. It is much more 
 probable that even at Alcman's early date Laconian 6 was 
 pronounced s (or some sound closely approaching s^) — though 
 at that time it was in Laconia still ivritten 6 — and hence the 
 change was made to s later in Laconian vrriting also, to repre- 
 sent the sound with which 6 had been pronounced in Laconian 
 from at least as early as Alcman's time. Aristophanes, etc., 
 finding that the Laconians of their own day pronounced the 
 6 in this " sigmatic " fashion, deliberately transliterated this 
 Laconian ^ by s as the closest representation possible.- 
 
 My argument therefore is that inasmuch as 6 was pronounced 
 in the Laconian dialect in a manner so like s that Aristophanes 
 Thucydides and others actually transliterated it hy s, it is a 
 logical conclusion that in the proximity of the Laconian dialect 
 of Greek, as represented in South Italy by the important 
 Laconian colonies Tarentum and Heraclea, the neighbouring 
 Oscans (just as Thucydides, Aristophanes, etc.) must have re- 
 presented this Laconian 6 by s^ 
 
 ^ It is, of course, not impossible that Laconian 6 may have been pronounced 
 
 )> (= Modern English th in thigh, cloth), and that s (written later) was really 
 an attempt to represent (in writing) this spirant value. 
 
 - On the pronunciation of Laconian B, F. Blass, Pronunciation of Ancient 
 Greek'^, § 29, p. (Engl. ed. 1890) 111, and Brugmann, Grundr., vol. i. 1886, 
 § 495, and Gnech. Gramm. ^, 1890, § 34, p. 52, may usefully be referred to. 
 See also z«/ra § 7, p. 59, n. 2. 
 
 On Laconian d generallj' see further the Second PajJtr, § 7, infra, pp. 
 58 sqq. 
 
 ^ The fact that we do not find the icritten change of d to « in the Tables of 
 (the Laconian colon}) Heraclea, is no argument against my view, for neither
 
 U THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 That the S should be written in a different direction to the 
 rest of the inscription would be no real difficulty. According to 
 A. Fabretti, PalacograpMsche Shtdicn (1877), § 104, p. 82, there 
 is no Greek letter which takes a different direction to the rest 
 of the inscription so often as ^ and <,, ^ is the form that 
 ought strictly to be written, where the inscription runs from 
 left to right, ^ where it runs from right to left. He cites 
 many instances of wrong direction (quoting mostly from F. 
 Lenormant in Bhein. Mus., vol. xxii., 1867, pp. 279 &.), among 
 them ai.G. 28.i 
 
 Next d for rj. I do not know of any instance of the word 
 dviOrjKe itself spelt with a instead of rj on Laconian inscriptions, 
 either in Greece or in Italy. We find however eW/ce ( = WrjKe) 
 as a v.l. in Alcman {vid. supra), which is certainly worth 
 mentioning. 
 
 One way of explaining this difficulty is to suppose that the 
 a in the word under discussion (viz. avaauKer) is a hyper- 
 Dorism. Doric is noted for its retention of original a where 
 Attic preferred -q or e (as fidrrjp, aXXoKa) ; hence a might have 
 come in by false analogy here. For instances of hyper-Dorism 
 we have only to look at the Elean inscriptions, where they 
 abound. Thus the Elean inscriptions show d often, where even 
 Doric has rj — for example irardp : Doric Trar-qp, &c. (cf Carolus 
 Daniel, Dc Diakcto Eliaco, § 3, p. 17). Those who went to the 
 Olympian festival might well carry away with them a taint of 
 this characteristic of the Elean dialect. 
 
 Or again — and this, I thinh, is the better explanation of the 
 two — as the inscription in which avaauKer occurs is a votive 
 
 do we find it so irriffen on the early inscriptions of Laconia Proper, altliough 
 it has been shewn that its jyronunciation was nevertheless s (or a sound closely 
 approaching s). Hereon see further the Second Paper, infra, pp. 60-61. 
 ^ See further the Second Paper, § 5, infra, pp. 49 sqq.
 
 FIRST PAPER 15 
 
 inscription, the a has most probably come in from wrongly 
 assumed connexion with Osc. o-aKopo ' sacrum/ s a k r i m 
 ' sacrum,' sakahiter ' sanciatur,' &c. For a parallel example 
 compare sacrophagus, which arose in vulgar Latin from (and 
 beside) sarcophagus ^ through the influence of sacer (J. H. Kirk- 
 land, in C.R, vol. vi., 1892, p. 435).2 
 
 The T is no real difficulty, for Oscan in the Greek 
 alphabet regularly writes -t in the 3rd sing, of the secondary 
 tenses, while in the native alphabet it has -d (cf. Prof. Conway 
 in A.J.P. vol. xi., 1890, pp. 309 f.).^ 
 
 The alteration of the e (augment) to a may easily have 
 arisen in a short syllable from ignorance on the part of those 
 who borrowed the word. 
 
 The explanation of avaaaKer offered in the present paper 
 may not be entirely void of difficulty, but as the word does not 
 seem to have been hitherto satisfactorily explained, I may be 
 pardoned for putting forward my own view.* 
 
 1 On the form xacrophacjus see H. iSchuchardt, Der Vokalismns des Vulgdr- 
 lateins (1866-1868), vol. iii., pp. 11, .348, and 0. Keller, Lateinische Volksety- 
 moJogie und Verwandtes (1891), pp. 73, 128, 163. 
 
 - See further the Second Paper, infra § 3, pp. 37-40. 
 
 3 See further the Second Paper, infra, § 2 (pp. 30-37), especially pp. 34-37. 
 
 * As a quasi-parallel to avacaKeT (in case my explanation be right) might 
 be mentioned the Phrygian oSSa/cer a^aKer which are generally referred 
 to 6i)K-, Lat. yec-j from Idg. sjdht- {v. Brugmann Grnndr., Eng. Ed., vol. iv. 
 1892, § 864 Rem.), just as I would refer avaaaK^r also back to aveOrjKe; 
 there being however this difference, that the Phrygian forms are not 
 necessarily supposed to have been borrowed, while I believe that avaaaKer 
 certainly was so.
 
 THE SECOND PAPER 
 
 ON 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD 
 ANASAKET
 
 BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE SECOND PAPER 
 
 ON THE OSCAN WORD 
 
 ANASAKET. 
 
 § 1, Pp., 25-30. — Answer to Prof. R. S. Conway's question : — Can a verb "be 
 borrowed at all except under certain special (e.g. political) 
 conditions " ? 
 
 § 2, Pp. 30-37. — Answer to Prof. Conway's questions : — Can a verb be trans- 
 ferred " in a particular tense, and that tense only, from 
 one language to another " ? Can a verb "be 'borrowed' 
 with its tense-termination affixed " ? 
 
 § 3, Pp. 37-40.— The third a of avaaaKer. 
 
 § 4, Pp. 40-49. — Contradiction of Prof. Conway's statement that the symbol 
 S is "used elsewhere with the value/." 
 
 Reasons for doubt concerning the alleged use of a symbol 
 ^ to represent Osc. / in Greek writing. 
 
 Arguments to shew that, even assuming the existence of 
 such use of a symbol ^, the S of the Oscan words avaSaner 
 and SeffTtes cannot be this supposed symbol ^. 
 
 '(1) Inscriptions showing Sigma written in a different 
 direction to the rest of the inscription. 
 § 5, Pp. 49-53. — \ (2) Inscriptions showing two different kinds of Sigma 
 
 (a) in the same sentence, (b) in the same word, in 
 some cases one Sigma being reversed. 
 
 § 6, Pp. 53-58.— 
 
 f(l) Objections to Prof. Conway's postulated *anafahet. 
 X(2) Doubt concerning Prof. Conway's postulated *Festies. 
 
 § 7, Pp. 58-64. — The main question (as from Prof. R. S. Conway's remarks in 
 C.E. vol. viii. p. 348 it would appear to be) : The sound 
 of the Z-acomaji-Greek d (as contrasted with that of the 
 other Greek dialects) ; and the representation of Greek 9 
 on Italic soil. 
 
 P. 65. — Conclusion. 
 
 c 2
 
 ABSTRACT 
 
 OP 
 
 THE SECOND PAPER 
 
 ON 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET. 
 
 This Abstract ^ which has been already published in the Camhridge 
 Philological Society's Proceedings, 1895, xl.— xlii. (publ. 1896), pp. 
 9 sq., is (with slight alterations) reprinted here by the kind permission of 
 Mr. P. Giles, Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, Hon. Sec. of the 
 Cambridge Philological Society. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 At a meeting of the Society held on May 23rd, 1895, at Dr. Sandys' 
 house, the President (Dr. Postgate) in the chair, Mr. L. Horton-Smith read 
 a paper on the Oscan (Bruttian) word ANASAKET, in reply to the stric- 
 tures of Prof. R. S. Conway (C. E., voL viii., Oct., 1894, p. 348) on his ex- 
 planation (C. it., vol. viii. May, 1894, pp. 198 sqq.-) that the Bruttian-Oscan 
 inscriptional T3)IASAMA is correctly transliterated avaaraKer, and that this 
 avaa-aK^T is the Greek loord dvtdrjKe ' he dedicated,'' as borrowed by the 
 Bruttian- Oscans from the Laconian Greeks of South Italy. 
 
 A further and incidental aim of the paper was to invalidate the 
 statements which Prof. Conway, I.e., had made in favour of his own 
 theory {C.P.S.T., vol. iii., part iv., 1892, p. 223, and C.R., vol. vii., 1893, 
 p. 468) that the symbol S could be transliterated by/, and the word be 
 read ^avafaKsr with the meaning ' he dedicated.' ^ 
 
 ^ A shorter abstract of this paper was published in the Cambridge Univer- 
 sity Reporter, No. 1078, June 11, 1895, p. 967, and was thence reprinted in 
 The Academy, No. 1207, June 22, 1895, p. 527 b, c. 
 
 2 Su}jra pp. 1 — 15. ^ Vid. siipi-a pp. 4 sq. 8 sq.
 
 22 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 The following is a brief abstract of the paper : — 
 
 (1) The objection that a verb cannot be borrowed at all "except v;nder 
 certain special {e.g. political) conditions " was unfounded,^ as also 
 
 (2) were the objections that a verb cannot be transferred "in a particular 
 tense, and that tense only, from one language to another," and that a verb 
 cannot " be ' borrowed ' with its tense-termination affixed." ^ 
 
 (3) The third a of avaaaKer was due to assumed connexion with the Oscan 
 words cra*copo 'sacrum,' sakrim 'sacrum,' sakahiter ' sanciatur ' etc. 
 Interesting jiarallels hereto were cited. ^ 
 
 (4) Prof. Conway's statement that "the symbol S '' is "used elsewhere 
 with the value/" called for direct contradiction. Doubt was, moreover, 
 thrown on the alleged use of the symbol ^ to represent Osc. / in Greek 
 writing ; and further, assuming for sake of argument that Fensernum had 
 invented such a symbol ^ =/, it was shewn that even so the S of avaSaKfr 
 and of SecTTies could not be this symbol ^.* 
 
 (5) No objection could be taken to the writing of the S in a different 
 direction to the rest of the inscription ; and, more especially, inscriptions 
 were cited shewing two different kinds of Sigma («) in the same sentence 
 (b) in the same word, in some cases one Sigma being reversed. Thus the 
 grcqjhic argument fell to the ground.^ 
 
 (6) Prof. Conway's statement that T3>iASAHA ^"^""^ ^3IT^3S ^^^ words 
 in which the S " may perfectly well be read as /," and that *anafahet 
 and *Festies are " perfectly good Oscan words " was next discussed, 
 (i) *anafaket: — (a) That the root fac-, unco)npoimded, was used in Latin 
 and Umbrian with some such meaning as " to dedicate," was not denied. 
 But there was not a shred of Italic evidence to warrant the assumption that 
 the verb coixld be used in composition with such a meaning (Umbr. 
 aanfehtaf could not bear the meaning ' dedicated.' ^) It was, moreover, 
 extremely doubtful whether even uncompounded it could be used for the 
 dedication of such a thing as a ' helmet.'' (b) The theory of borrowing 
 explained " das scheinbar nicht apokopierte ana in avaa-aKer " (C. D. Buck, 
 Voc. d. OsJc. Spr., 1892, p. 15) much better than Prof. Conway's view that 
 ana- is here for an-ad-. (c) Composition of a verb with two prepositions 
 occurs nowhere else in Oscan, nor can a single example be cited from 
 Umbrian. (d) The combination in + ad + verb, to which Prof. Conway 
 says that his Osc. *an-ad-fahet (whence his *anafahet) corresponds, does 
 not occur even in Latin till quite late, and then only in a otto^ Xey. of 
 Tertullian (160 A.D.— 240 a.d.). (ii) *Festies might be a "perfectly 
 
 1 § 1, infra pp. 25-30. 2 § 2, infra pp. 30-37. ' § 3, infra pp. 37-40. 
 
 » § 4, infra pp. 40-49. s § 5^ j-,^,^ pp_ 49_53_ 
 
 « For the true explanation of Umbr. aanfehtaf see infra § 6, p. 54, n. 3.
 
 ABSTRACT OF THE SECOND PAPER 23 
 
 good Oscan word," but that was no argument against the equally good 
 Oscan word Sesties ' Sestius, Sextius ' ; the name Festius was, inoreove r 
 extremely rare.^ 
 
 (7) As to Prof. Conway's main contention that 6 could not have been 
 represented by s in Oscan, the question to be asked should not be " What 
 was the sound of S in Oscan 1 " but " What was the sound of d in Laconian ? " 
 That Laconian 6 was a sound differing widely from the 6 of the other 
 Greek dialects was amply proved by the united evidence of Grammarians, 
 Inscriptions and MSS. Whatever may have been its exact sound, whether 
 s, or |> ( = Engl, th in thigh, cloth), the /aci remained that foreigner.^ (e.g. 
 the Athenians) reiyresented it by s. — [Prof. Conway's statements concerning 
 the Italic representation of the regular Greek aspirates (which proved to 
 be correct only for the period prior to the second century B.C., at which 
 date th appears beside t, as the transliteration of Gk. 6) applied only to the 
 representation of the ordinary-Greek, not the Laconian-Greek, &]. — Inas- 
 much, therefore, as 6 was pronounced in the Laconian Dialect in a 
 manner so like s that Aristophanes, Thucydides and others actually 
 transliterated it by s, it was an obvious conclusion that in the proximity of 
 the Laconian dialect of Greek, as represented by the important Laconian 
 colonies Tarentum and Heraclea, the neighbouring Oscans, just as Aristo- 
 phanes etc., must have represented this Laconian 6 by s.^ 
 
 Finally Prof. Conway, by allowing " 150 miles from the borders of 
 Latium (in the dialectic, not the political sense) " as the extreme limit of 
 distance across which ordinary common words could be carried to Latium 
 (/f/(/. Forsch., vol. ii. p. 158), had himself given the most conclusive reason 
 why no example of s : ^ occurs in Saalfeld's books on Greek loan-words in 
 Latin ; for Heraclea is 205, Tarentum 225 miles south of the most southern 
 hotmdary of Latium thus defined, so that it would be surprising indeed if 
 Latin were to show any traces of this s : 6.^ 
 
 § 6, infra pp. 53-58. 2 § 7^ j,^.^^ pp_ 5g_64. 3 j^j-^a p. 64.
 
 THE OSCAN WOED 
 
 ANA SAKE T 
 
 SECOND paper; 
 
 Read {in outline) hcfore the Cambridge Philological Society on 
 
 May 23, 1895.2 
 
 In C.R vol. viii. (May 1894), pp. 198-201,3 I endeavoured 
 to prove that the Bruttian-Oscan "avaaaKCT vms a boo'roiocd. 
 vjord, and represents the Ch'ceh word dv eOrj Ke, so common 
 in Greek votive inscriptions vAth the meaning ' dedicated an 
 offering'". Or rather, to put my case more exactly, I endeavoured 
 to i>TOYetha,ithcBo'uttian-Oscan inscriptional T3>1ASAHA is correctly 
 transliterated avaaaKer, and this word avaaaKer represents the 
 common Greek word dvk6r]Ke ' (lie) dedicated' as borrowed by the 
 Bruttian-Oscans from the Laeonian Greeks of Sonth Italy. 
 
 Prof. R. S. Conway in a more recent number, vol. viii. (Oct. 
 1894), p. 348, has criticised various points in my discussion, 
 endeavouring at the same time to maintain his own theory 
 
 * The present is the paper referred to by anticipation in the Essay on the 
 Establishment and Extenf<ion of the Law of Thurneysen and Havet, part ii. § 7 
 (A.J. P., vol. xvii., July 1896), p. 183, n. 2, and, more lately, in the paper on 
 ' Latin Barha and its initial 5' in C.B., vol. x., Dec. 1896, p. 430. 
 
 2 An abstract of this 'Second Paper' will have been found in the fore- 
 going pages (pp. 21-23). ^ = pp. 1-15, supra.
 
 26 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 {C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 223, and C.R. vol. vii. Dec. 
 1893, p. 4G8) that the symbol S of T3>IASAHA is to be trans- 
 literated by / and that the word is to be read avafaKer 
 ' dedicated.' ^ 
 
 My aim in the present paper is to clear the way for the 
 acceptance of my view on T3>iASAHA by answering in detail 
 and at sufficient length the adverse criticisms of Prof. Conway 
 (C.R. viii. p. 348), and by invalidating also the statements 
 which Prof. Conway (I.e.) has made in favour of his own theory. 
 His statements and arguments, which at first sight would 
 appear so overwhelming, will not, I think, bear a very close 
 investigation. 
 
 §§ 1 and 2. 
 
 In the first place Prof Conway affects to regard as "very 
 serious " the questions " whether a verb can be ' borrowed ' 
 with its tense termination affixed, or whether a verb can be 
 borrowed at all except under certain special (e.g. political) 
 conditions." We must therefore, before passing on, examine 
 these questions. We shall find that these two arguments 
 brought against my theory of borrowing are untenable. (For 
 the sake of convenience I invert the order of the questions.) 
 
 ^ 1- 
 Can " a verb he horroioed at all, except under certain special 
 (e.g. political) conditions " ? 
 
 § 1 It would be interesting (though difficult) to understand 
 Prof. Conway's object in raising this question. For even if he 
 were right in imagining that " a verb can " only " be borrowed 
 
 ^ In C.Ii. viii. p. 199 {= pp. 8-9 supra), attention was incidentally drawn 
 to the improbability of this theory.
 
 SECOND PAPER 27 
 
 under certain special {e.g. political) conditions," he could never- § 1 
 theless hardly refuse to include " religious " ^, as well as 
 "political" and (he would doubtless add, c.^.) " legal ",- among 
 such " special conditions." " Keligious conditions " once 
 admitted (as indeed they must be ^), his argument would fall 
 to the ground quite apart from any consideration of the answer 
 to the specific question which he has raised. 
 
 To the particular question raised, however, the answer (it 
 need scarcely be said) must be in the affirmative : — 
 
 (ft) Latin. 
 
 Saalfeld's Tenscmncs Italo-Graecus, the very book to which 
 for other purposes Prof. Conway refers, shows numerous in- 
 stances of verbs borrowed by Latin from Greek, many of which 
 certainly cannot be said to have been borrowed only " under 
 certain special (e.g. political) conditions " : for example, emtio, 
 
 1 Compare the following instances (cited in Saalfeld's Tensaurus Italo- 
 (jlraecus) of Greek verbs bearing on religion, which were borrowed by Latin : 
 dncithenuUlzo, haptizo, blasphemo, cdnonlzo, ctUechlzo, Christidnizo, iuddlzo, 
 ■sahhdtlzo, sranddl'izo. Interesting examples of verbs borrowed from Latin by 
 Gaelic under similar circumstances are the following : — aor <Lat. oro, baist 
 <Lat. baptizare, coisrig <Lat. consecrare, creid <Lat. credo (J. S. Blackie, 
 The Language and Literature of the Scottish Highlands, 1876, pp. 31-32). 
 
 - Many of our English law-terms are verbs borrowed from French: e.g., 
 acroche (earlier form of accroach) < 0. Fr. acrocher ; amortise < Fr. amort- 
 iss-, extended stem of ctmort-ir ; anientise < 0. Fr. anientiss-, extended stem 
 of anientir (later aniantir, anaiantir, aneantir); appeal (from M.E. appelen, 
 apelen) < 0. Fr. aj^eler ; arace < Anglo-French aracer, 0. Fr. aracier ; arrest 
 
 < 0. Fr. arester (whence Mod. Fr. arreter) ; assart < Anglo-French assarter, 
 ■ier, -ir (Britton), 0. Fr. essarter ; demur < 0. Fr. demeurer, demourer ; 
 deraign, dereyn < Fr. deraigner ; hap < Fr. hajij^er ; recoupe < Fr. recouper ; 
 and the following verbs used as substantives : devise < Fr. deviser ; fuer < 
 Fr. fair ; oyer and terminer preserved exactly from the French forms ; prrender 
 
 < Fr, ^^rejic^re; trover < Fr. trouver (cf. H. J. Holthouse, A Neio Law 
 Dict."^ 1846; also Concise Etym. Diet, of the Engl. Lang, by W. W. Skeat; 
 New Engl. Diet, on Historical Principjhs, by J. A. H. Murray ; and the 
 Standard Diet, of the Engl. Lang by Funk and Wagnall's Company). 
 
 3 See note 1, supra.
 
 28 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 1 atticisso, hUdisso bddizo, caonjjso, chdlo, crStdlisso [whence crStdi- 
 listrkt, Prop. 4 (5), 8, 39], cyathisso, comisso, dejpso'^, gargdrlzo 
 gargeirisso, gUhcrno'^, mdldcisso, pardtrd^gocdo, imtrisso, propino^ 
 pscdlo, 2^j/iisso, scHvlfo scctrij^Jio, straoigUlo, &c., and many cited 
 by Weisc in Arch, filr Lat. Lcxicogr. 1893, pp. 339 sqq., e.g., 
 ohsono, &c.^ Examples of verbs which owe their existence or 
 particular form in Latin to some other non-Latin ItaHc 
 dialect are fundo ' I pour,' the initial / of Avhich is most 
 probably due to Sabine influence,* bocto probably a loan-word 
 from Oscan [(cf. Osc. balteis), see Brugmann, Grundr. vol. i. 
 § 432 h, Rem. i.], and d/eo olfdcio, the last two of which, on 
 Prof. Conway's own showing (in Idg. Fursch. vol. ii. p. 165), are 
 due to Sabine influence.^ 
 
 ^ Cf. also Brugmann, Grundr., Eng. Ed., vol. iv. § 661. 
 
 ^ From Kv0epvco {-dw). Cf. also Max Miiller, Science of Langiiage, New 
 Edition (1882), vol. i. Lect. iii. p. 108, note 19. So too Prof. Conway himself 
 in A.J. P. vol. xi. (1890) p. 310. 
 
 ^ In this connection it is of interest to observe that Greek verbs were also 
 extensively borrowed by both the ' Boheiric ' and ' Sahidic ' dialects of Coptic 
 [or, as it is also called (see F. Blass, Pron. of Anc. Greeh,^ % 28, Engl. ed. 1890, 
 p. I(i6) ' Egyptian-Christian']; e.g. (by 'Sahidic') the Greek verbs atrocpalveiv, 
 IT aT iff creiv, ireideiv, Tr\T]cr(Tfiv, ffvvdyeiv, vffpi^eip, jueAerar, roXfiav, afj.e\e7v, K\r]po- 
 vofielv, Kofffiilv, \vire7v, TrAer^, (TTotxe'iv, a^iovv, ^effaiovv, ayctjviCfcrOat, alcrddvecrOat, 
 &pXf(r6at, acnrd(ea-6at, vKOKpiveadai, dpfuadai, also (verbs in -fit) KadlarTjfxt, Trapa- 
 5i'5co^i ; and (by both 'Boheiric' and 'Sahidic') SoKiixdCeiv, -irKTreveiv, alre^v, 
 iTnTiiJ.av. See L. Stern, Koptische Grammatilc, 1880, § 331, pp. 159 sq. 
 
 * Elsewhere, in an essay on The Establishment and Extension of the Law 
 of Thurneysen and Havtt, Part i. § 3, in The American Journal of Philology, 
 vol. xvi. Dec. 1885, p. 450 note 1, I have endeavoured to prove "that the / 
 which appears beside or instead of Lat. h from Idg. gh in many words . . . 
 is really due to Sabine influence." Cf. also P. Giles, Short Manual of Com- 
 parative Philology, % 138, p. 112, and p. 112, note 1. 
 
 " In A.J. P. xi. (1890) p. 309, Prof. Conway, discussing Oscan hipid 
 ' habuerit,' says : " I believe both the Oscan and the Umbrian word (Umbr. 
 habetu, habust, &c. ) were borrowed from Latin." Whether this belief be 
 correct or not (a question which it is here unnecessary to consider), it is at 
 least obvious that in 1890 Prof. Conway saw no objection to the proposition 
 that a verb may be borrowed by one language from another without any 
 .special conditions being implied at all. What can have occurred in the 
 interval to make Prof. Conway change his mind ?
 
 SECOND PAPER 29 
 
 (b) English. § i 
 
 Verbs of all sorts have been borrowed by English from 
 various sources, without any special conditions being implied. 
 Instances of verbs borrowed by English from the ' Latin of the 
 Second Period' (= 596-1000 a.d.^) are to dight, offer, shrive, 
 spend, stop} An instance of a verb, which, borrowed from 
 ' Latin of the Second Period,' was supplanted later by a French 
 fonn, is A.S. prcdician (from Lat. j;ra;f?imrc) supplanted by 
 Engl, preach (from Old Fr. precher)? The following verbs have 
 been borrowed from French verbs, which in their turn owe 
 their origin in French to Latin : to dauh,^ escape, esloyne 
 (Spenser, F. Q. I. iv. 20, 1), render, traverse. Examples of verbs 
 borrowed by English 'in the Modern Period, since 1500' from 
 French verbs, which in their turn owed their origin in French 
 to Scandinavian, are to hrandish, hraze, equip, froion, grate, grudge, 
 hale or haid, jib (said of a horse), rinse, strive, waive.^ Verbs 
 borrowed by English direct from Scandinavian verbs are to cast, 
 clip (cut), die, fiing, gasp, gaze, rive, take, thrive, &c.^ Finally, to 
 talk, one of the very commonest words in the English language, 
 is a borrowed verb.'^ 
 
 {(■) Scotch. 
 
 We find the language of Scotland reflecting the French occu- 
 pation of the time of Queen Mary's minority (cf. E, B, Ramsay, 
 Reminiscences of Scottish Life and Gharacter^'^, 1874, ch. vii. ad fin.). 
 Confining ourselves here to instances of vcrhs borrowed from 
 French, we may cite, e.g., jalouse (<[ Fr. jalouser), ' suspect, have 
 
 1 See W. W. Skeat, Principles of Engl. Etijm., First Series 2, 1892, 
 oh. xxi., p. 433. 
 
 - Skeat, ib. ch. xxi. p. 441. ^ Skeat, ih. ch. xxi. p. 441 sq. 
 
 * Skeat, ih. ch. xxii. p. 444. ^ Skeat, ih, ch. xxiii. p. 480. 
 
 « Skeat, ih. chh. xviii. p. 365, xxiii. pp. 466, 467, 470, 471. 
 
 ^ Skeat, Etym. Did. of the Ewjl. Lang.- (1884), and Concise Etymol. Diet, 
 of the En'jl. Lang.- (1885), s.v. talk.
 
 30 THE OSCAN WORD ANA8AKET 
 
 § 1 a suspicion, think/ visie vizy vizzy (■< Fr. viscr), ' to visit, look 
 into, examine, take aim,' both still to be heard in Scotland, and 
 the more covamon fftsh^ (•< Fr.fdchcr) 'to trouble, vex,' Jlccch'^ 
 (•< Fr. fl6cMr) 'to supplicate, pray,' dook'^ (•< Fr. do^icher) 'to 
 douse, duck, bathe.' - 
 
 In view of the numerous instances just quoted, can it still be 
 considered such a " very serious question " " whether a verb can 
 be borrowed at all except under certain special {e.g. political) 
 conditions " ? 
 
 §2. 
 
 Can a verb he transferred " in a particidar tense, and that 
 tense only, from one langimge to another " ?- Cctn a verb " be 
 ' borroiced ' with its tense termination affixed " ? 
 
 §2 In C.B. vol. viii. p. 348, note 1, Prof. Conway remarks that he 
 knows of " no examples of the transference of a verb in a par- 
 ticular tense, and that tense only, from one language to another." 
 There are, I venture to think, but few scholars who would 
 see any difficulty in the theory that avedrjKe should have been 
 transferred in its own imrticular tense (and, we might even add, 
 person and number). As was said in C.R. vol. viii. p. 200,^ 
 "Perhaps of all (Greek) inscriptions those commemorating 
 votive offerings are the most common, and of all the words 
 which occur on these inscriptions dveOrjKe is probably the 
 most frequent." Hence we should rather have been surprised, 
 had any other tense (and, we might again add, person and 
 number) than aveOrjKe been chosen. 
 
 ^ Fash, fleech, dook, all occur in Burns. 
 
 "^ These Scotch examples are especially in point here, because the French 
 occupation in Scotland affords in some respects a close historical parallel to 
 tlie position of the Greek colonies among the Osci. 
 
 ^ = p. 11, unjyra.
 
 SECOND PAPER 31 
 
 However, if this be not enough to prove my point, I subjoin § 2 
 from other lanQ^uaofes a few instances of such transference in 
 support of my view : — 
 
 An instance from Latin : — 
 
 If Prof. Conway (in IcUj. Fursch. ii. p. 165) is right in holding 
 that laint, which occurs once in Pacuvius, in the line ' Lapit cor 
 cura, aerumna corpus conficii ' (Pacuv. Fragin. Trag. 1. 276, Rib. ; 
 cf. also Non. i. 87, and Paul, ex Fest. p. 118, Miill.), is one of the 
 " words which were never really Latin at all, but simply observed 
 by Latins in Sabine sources," Prof. Conway has himself furnished 
 us with an exact example " of the transference of a verb in a 
 particular tense, and that tense only, from one language to 
 another." 
 
 Instances from English and Scotch : — 
 
 Semble, ' il semble, it seems,' used frequently in English legal 
 terminology (see H. J. Holthouse, A New Law Dict.^^ 1846, p. 
 867), is simply the borrowed 3rd sing. pres. indie, act. of the 
 French verb senibler} Cf., e.g., The Law Reports : Common 
 Pleas, vol. viii. (1873) p. 328, " Semhle that the section creates 
 no statutory cause of action " ; also Chancery Division, vols. xvii. 
 (1881) p. 174, xviii. (1881) p. 199 ; A. P. Stone, Digest of Cases, 
 
 ^ The borrowing of semhle, ' it seems,' in its complete form as a 3rd sing. 
 pres. indie, act. of Fr. fieinbler, is of course to be entirely distinguished from 
 the borrowing of the same verb's stem and the conjugation of the latter as an 
 English verb [viz. to semble, whence 3rd sing. pres. indie, act. sembles (cf. Old 
 Eng. Metr. Hom., ed. Small, p. 134, cited by W. D. Whitney, The Century 
 Diet, of the Engl. Lang., 1889 sqq., p. 5482, "Ite sembeles that he slepand is")]. 
 That this is so, is obvious from the fact that, whereas the English verb 
 to semhle has become obsolete (see Whitney I.e.), the borrowed semble 
 ' it seems ' has firmly held its ground (see the text). For a parallel to the 
 present case, see below p. 33, n. 1.
 
 32 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 2 vol. iii. (1892) col. 6286; aud The Annual Practice, 1895, vol. i. 
 ]). (\U, 1. 19.^ 
 
 Oyez,- the thrice repeated proclamation of public criers both 
 in England and Scotland,^ is simply the borrowed 2nd pi. pres. 
 imperat. of the above-mentioned French verb oyer 'to hear,' 
 and is the only example of it used as a verb in English. 
 
 Gardy, preserved in gardy loo, the well-known Edinburgh 
 cry to warn the passengers below that the foul water was 
 on the point of being poured out of the house-windows 
 into the street, is simply the French 2nd plur. pres. imperat. 
 gardcz {gardy loo representing the French garclcz Vcau). See 
 Ramsay, op. cit.. I.e. 
 
 Proochy, again, used in Scotland as a call to a cow when one 
 wishes her to draw near, is really the French 2nd pi. pres. 
 imperat. act. approchez, Cf. Ramsay, I.e. 
 
 Further we may cite stct and dele, regularly used in cor- 
 recting proof-sheets for the printers. 
 
 Ignoramus, ' we are ignorant, Ave ignore ' — the word formerly 
 written on a bill of indictment by a grand jury when there was 
 not sufficient evidence to warrant them in finding it a true bill 
 — is simply a borrowed Latin word,^ being the 1st plur. pres. 
 indie, act. of the Latin verb ignoro. See Webster, op. cit. p.655.^ 
 
 ^ With semble ' it seems,' borrowed from the French, we may compare also 
 the borrowed yeq/oi7e (somewhat similarly preserved in English legal termin- 
 ology), which is nothing else than Fr. faifailli (see Holthouse, o/>. cit. p. 235, 
 and N. Webster, Comjjkte Diet, of the Eivjl. Lawj., ed. 1889, p. 725). 
 
 -' Written also Oyt'i, yes. Oh yes. 
 
 3 For instances of it in Scotland, see Howe, Everybody's Book of Scotch Wit 
 and Humour"^, pp. 31, 134. 
 
 * The verb to vjnore, on the other hand — conjugated throughout as an 
 English verb — is borrowed from French (viz. Fr. ignorer). See W. W. Skeat, 
 Etym. Diet, of the Engl. Lang.^ 1884, p. 281, s.v. ignore ; and W. D. Whitney 
 oj). cit., p. 2982, s.v. ignore. 
 
 ' With ignoramus we may compare also the following Latin verbs some- 
 what similarly preserved — each in a particiilar tense, number and person —
 
 SECOND PAPER 33 
 
 Add 2\%o jior., jioniit ; and 6b., obiit, W. D. Whitney, Tlu 
 Century Diet, of the Engl. Lang., 1889 sqq^., p. 4052, Webster, 
 op. cit. p. 1778. 
 
 Two more good instances are afforded by the very general 
 use in English of the Latin loan-words vid., vide, ' see,' and of. 
 (=Lat. confer), 'compare,' taking an object exactly as if they 
 were native English verbs. 
 
 We may cite also the familiar N.{B.), Nota (Bene), Webster, 
 op. cit. p. 1777. 
 
 Assumpsit — as, for instance, in Whitney, ojj. cit. p. 351 
 (where this common legal term is discussed), " The defendant 
 assumpsit, that is, promised or undertook, to perform the act " — 
 is, of course, the borrowed 3rd sing, of the aor. indie, act. of Lat. 
 assumo.'^ 
 
 We may also add the familiar school-boy cry of cave, warning 
 comrades of the master's approach. It is the borrowed 2nd 
 sing. pres. imperat. act. of Lat. caveo. 
 
 Query, again, though now generally used as a substantive, 
 was originally borrowed as the 2nd sing, imperat. of a verb. It 
 is a modernised spelling of older guere, which was nothing but 
 a mis-spelling of qumrc, the borrowed 2nd sing. pres. imperat. 
 act. of the Latin verb qumrcrc, ' to seek, ask, inquire ' (see Skeat, 
 Etym. Diet, of the Engl. Lang? 1884, p. 484; and Webster, op. 
 cit. p. 1074 c, s.v. Query, n.). The form qiimre itself, still used as 
 
 ill English legal phraseology : constat, devastavit, elegit, indicavit, inspeximus, 
 mandamus, 2}raecipe, etc., for the explanation of which see Holthouse, op. cit., 
 and Webster, op. cit. 
 
 ^ As in the case discussed above, p. 31, n. 3, so too here the borrowing of 
 assumjMit in its complete form, as 3rd sing, of the aor. indie, act. of Lat. 
 assume, is to be entirely distinguished from the borrowing of the same verb's 
 stem and the conjugation of the latter as an English verb [viz. to assume, 
 whence 3rd sing. aor. indie, act. assumed]. 
 
 D
 
 34 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 2 a verb, is given in Webster, o}'). cit. p. 1070 b (s.v. Qumrc, v. i.), 
 and this form may be quoted from J. Williams, Principles of the 
 Laiv of Real Property, 18G5, p. 10, note t. ^ 
 
 Finally (and before we come to the further class of examples 
 cited infra, pp. 35 ad fin., 36, and 37 ad inif) we quote an 
 instance from ' In a Library,' a poem in The St. James's 
 Gazette of 19 Dec. 1896, p. 4. The poet (who personates Mr. 
 Gladstone for the nonce), after apostrophising various works 
 (including Mr. Gladstone's translation of The Odes of Horace,^ 
 1895), closes the 4th stanza as follows : — 
 
 " Yet now valete ! Chloe — Lalage — 
 That shelf must bear Butler's ' Analogy.' " 
 
 The T of avaaaKe-T is, of course, quite easily explained. It 
 would naturally be added by the engraver of the inscription, 
 to bring the borrowed word into harmony with the regular 
 Oscan secondary tenses, -t being the regular termination of the 
 3rd sing, of the Oscan secondary tenses in Oscan inscriptions 
 written in the Greek alphabet (see the former paper on avacraKer 
 in C.R. viii. p. 201,^ and Prof. Conway in A.J.P., vol. xi. 1890, 
 pp. 309 sq) ; cf., for instance, Osc. SeSer ' dedit ' (Zvetaieff, 
 LLI.D. No. 246, p. 75). 
 
 This addition of the t in avaa-aKe-r (purely a question of 
 analogy, as just pointed out, the t being added on analogy of 
 the native Oscan forms such as SeSer) may fairly be paralleled 
 by the following very similar example of the force of analogy in 
 Modern French : — The t which is added in interrogative clauses 
 of the 3rd sing., such as a-t-il ? aime-t-il ? chante-t-il ? donnera- 
 
 1 Also from the Law Reports : Exchequer Cases, vol. iv. (1869), p. 303 ; 
 Common Pleas Division, vol. i. (1876), p. 169 ; Queen's Bench Division, vol. xiv. 
 ( 1885), p. 973 ; Chancery Dicision, (1891) vol. ii., p. 449, etc. 2 _p_ 15^ ,^xipra.
 
 SECOND PAPER 35 
 
 t-il ? chanta-t-il ? aaid the like, is solely due to the analogy of § 2 
 — [or, in other words, to the desire on the part of the speaker 
 to bring the interrogative ^-less forms of the 3rd sing., a il? 
 <time il ? chante il ? donnera il ? chanta il ? and the like (which 
 had lost their original, i.e. Latin, t), into harmony with] — 
 such forms as cst-il ? boit-il ? dort-il ? court-il ? regoit-il ? chantait- 
 il ? chanterait-il ? chantdt-il ? and the like (which had never lost 
 their original t). This has been conclusively proved by G. Paris 
 in Romania, Q'' Annee, 1877, pp. 438 — 442 (cf. also A. Tobler, 
 Vom Franzosischen Versbau Alter imd Neuer Zcit ^, Leipzig, 
 1894, pp. 62—66). 
 
 Will it be objected that the foregoing is only an example of 
 the influence of analogy working on and confined to the native 
 {i.e. non-borrowed) verb-forms of a language (in this case the 
 French language), and that therefore it affords little, if any, 
 support to my explanation of the r of avacruKer ? 
 
 Very apt examples of ' borrowed ' verb-forms, to which the 
 terminations of the borrowing language have been " affixed," 
 may therefore, in anticipation of such an objection, and as 
 supplementary to the above-cited illustration of the force of 
 analogy in French, be given as follows : — 
 
 Placets, non-placets, placeted, non-placeted, phraseology regu- 
 larly used in connection with the proceedings of the Senate in 
 the University of Cambridge, e.g. ' So and so placets or non- 
 placets the grace ' (an instance of which occurred during March, 
 1896, in the 'University Intelligence' of The Times), is the 
 Latin verb-form placet {non-placet) borrowed by English, with 
 English tense-terminations affixed. 
 
 VisM, in the common phrase ' to have one's passports vised' 
 is (it need hardly be said) the French participle passive vied 
 
 D 2
 
 36 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 2 borrowed outright by English, with the English termination 
 -d affixed.^ 
 
 An example from German is to be found in the history of the 
 verbs in -icrcn. These, to use the words of H. Paul, Principles 
 of the History of Language^ (Engl. ed. 1888), ch. xxii. § 711, 
 p. 4C9, " took their rise from the fact that the German verbal 
 terminations attached themselves to the Old French infinitive 
 form in -ier already in existence." In other words, the old 
 French infinitives in -icr were " borrowed in their entirety " 
 by German, and then to this Old French infinitival termina- 
 tion -ier " already in existence," -en, the infinitival termination 
 of German, the borrowing language, was affixed ; whence Germ, 
 -ieren? See Paul, op. cit., ch. xxii. §§ 710-712, pp. 469 sq. ; and 
 W. Wilmanns, Deutsche Grammatih, vol. ii. part i. (1896), § 88, 
 p. 114.-^ 
 
 An instance finally, which proves conclusively that any 
 tense-form can be borrowed (person, number, inflection and 
 all) and conjugated in full with the tense-terminations of the 
 borrowing language, is the trapper American and colloquial 
 English verb vamos or vamose, ' to go away ' ; cf. e.g. Capt. 
 
 ^ Recent instances of the word occurred in The Daily Telegraph, Dec. 23, 
 1896, p. 5, col. 4, and in The Timen, Jan. 2, 1897, p. 5, col. 3. 
 
 2 Thus — [in this note "G." = F. Godefroy, Dictionnaire de Vancienne Langne 
 Franraise et de toiis ses Dialectes du ix^ au xv° slide (1880 sqq.) ; and 
 "H.D.T." = A. Hatzfeld, A. Darmesteter, A Thomas, Dictionnaire General 
 de la Langne Francaise (1890 fifjiq.)] — The Old French infinitives anoncier (G., 
 s.h.v. ; H.D.T., s.v. 'annoncer'), corrigier (H.D.T., s.v. 'corriger'), drecier 
 (G. , s.h.v. ; H.D.T., s.v. 'dresser), marchier (G. , s.h.v.), were "borrowed in 
 their entirety" by German, which then affixed to them its own infinitival 
 termination -en, and thus produced the German annoncieren, corrigiereny 
 dressieren, marschieren. 
 
 ^ It may be mentioned further that the accuracy of the present paragraph 
 and of its attendant note is fully confirmed by Dr. Karl Brevil (Fellow of 
 King's College, Cambridge, and University Lecturer in German), to whom 
 they were submitted for consideration.
 
 SECOND PAPER 37 
 
 Mayne Ueid, Bijle Bangers, ch. xiii. "They're vamosed through §2 
 the trees." This word was originally borrowed from Spanish, 
 being indeed Span, vamos, 'let us go,' the 1st plur. pres. 
 indie, (acting as 1st and 2nd pi. impv.) of the Spanish verb ir, 
 'to go.' See Whitney, op. cit. p. 6G92, and Webster, op. cit. 
 p. 1461 a} 
 
 Having now sufficiently shewn that there is no real objection 
 to my view that a verb may be (1) borrowed by one language 
 from another, even without any special conditions being 
 implied, and also (2) borrowed in one particular tense, and that 
 tense only, and borrowed with its tense termination affixed, we 
 will pass on to examine some other of Prof. Conway's adverse 
 criticisms. 
 
 § 3. 
 
 The third a of avacraKer. 
 
 In C.B. vol. viii. p. 201 ^ I gave two alternative explanations 
 of the third a of avacraKer. Prof. Conway in C.B. viii. p. 348 
 passes over, without any notice, the passage which I cited (C.B. 
 viii. pp. 200, 201 3) from Alcman 72 [24] (Bergk), where B. 
 actually gives eauKe ( = edrjKe), the very form which we are 
 seeking. But at the same time (ih. note 1) he implies, that if 
 I could give a single example of " the transference of a verb in 
 a particular tense, and that tense only, from one language to 
 another," he would not be so indisposed to accept my second 
 explanation, viz., that -ar)K- has become -aaK- from assumed 
 connexion with the Oscan words craKopo ' sacrum,' sakahiter 
 ' sanciatur,' sakrim 'sacrum,' etc., just as Lat. sarcophagus 
 
 1 Of the foregoing examples I am indebted for notice of the three last to 
 Mr. Welford. - = pp. 14-15, supra. •' = pp. 12, 14, siqjra.
 
 38 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 3 (borrowed from Gk. aapKO(f)dyo'i) gave rise in vulgar idiom 
 to the form sacrophagus through the influence of saccr'^ {C.R. 
 viii. p. 201 ^). Instances of such transference have now been 
 o-iven above, and there is therefore no actual necessity to delay 
 further over this point. 
 
 At the same time advantage may be taken of the present 
 opportunity, in order to add yet further evidence in support of 
 the above-mentioned ' second explanation.' 
 
 The ease with which such ' Volksetymologie ' comes into play 
 is admirably illustrated by the story of the old Scotchwoman 
 given by Howe, op. cit. p. QQ>, under the heading ' Consecrated 
 Ground ' : " The Police Commissioners of Broughton Ferry, near 
 Dundee, some time since compelled house proprietors to lay 
 down concrete on the footpath in front of their properties. An 
 old lady residing in a cottage proudly told a friend the other 
 day that the front of her house had been consecrated ^ up to the 
 vera doorstep." 
 
 Other equally good instances of ' Religious Folketymology ' 
 (if we may so call it) are : — 
 
 Saintfoin and St. Foin (Eng.), " old names for the lucerne, are 
 corrupt spellings of the word sainfoin, from" (Fr. sainfoin, from) 
 " Fr, sain 'wholesome' and foin ' ha}^,' Lat. sammi fwnum." 
 A. S. Palmer, Foil- Etymology, 1882, p. 337. 
 
 Saints' hell (Eng.), " a corrupt form of sanclus-bcll, a small bell 
 used in the Roman Catholic Church to call attention to the 
 more solemn parts of the mass, as at the conclusion of the 
 ordinary, when the words Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, are pro- 
 
 1 Many other instances of ' Volksetymologie ' will be found in Schuchardt, 
 Vokali)imus den Vulgiirlateins (1866-1868), vol. iii. pp. 347 ■■^qq-, and in Keller, 
 Lat. Volkselymoloyie und Verwandtes, 1891. 
 
 2 = p. 15, supra. ^ The italics are mine.
 
 SECOND PAPER 39 
 
 nounced by the priest, and on the elevation of the host and § 3 
 chaKce after consecration." Palmer, op. cit., p. 337. 
 
 Santoreggia (Ital.), the plant savory, " is an assimilation to 
 santo ' holy' of sahireja, Lat. satureia." Palmer, op. cit., p. 503. 
 
 Kill St. Ann and Saint Ann's Church (Eng.), alternative 
 names of a ruin near Tallaght, co. Dublin, " are corruptions of 
 the Old Irish Killmosanctan or Killsantan, ' the church {cill) of 
 Bishop Sanctan.' The true English form, therefore, would be 
 ' Santan's church.' " Palmer, op. cit., p. 555. 
 
 San Oracle (Ital.), " a corruption of the ancient name Soracte 
 misunderstood as ^S*. Oracle." Palmer, op. cit., p. 555 (s.v. San 
 Oreste). 
 
 St. Pidchrc (Eng.), " an old corruption of Sepulchre, i.e. St. 
 Sepulchre church in the Bailey." Palmer, op. cit., p. 559. And 
 similarly 
 
 ;S'^. Uhcs (Eng.), "a sailors' corruption of Setuhal." Palmer, 
 02). cit., p. 560.^ 
 
 With especial reference to the a of Osc. avaaaKer (already 
 sufficiently illustrated by sacrophagus, etc.) attention may be 
 drawn to the following extremely apt parallels offered by Latin 
 and by the Romance Languages : — 
 
 Latin : — Beside the legitimate Latin forms consecro, consecra- 
 tus, consecratoi; cmisecratrix, consecralio, here and there we meet 
 with forms which, instead of shewing the correct c-vowel, shew 
 an a-vowel due to the influence of Lat. sacro, siicratus ; for 
 example : we find conso^cravit and conssicrdvi in the Monu- 
 mentum Ancyranum of A.D. 14, ii. 30 and iv. 25 respectively 
 
 ^ Another interesting example of ' Volksetymologie ' — interesting especially 
 because involving a word actually founded on avaTiOrifj.L — is afforded us by 
 the late chapel-clerk of Lincoln's Inn. On this venerable man's lips the 
 ' Afhanasian Creed ' always figured as the ' Anathemation Creed.'
 
 40 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 3 (Til. Mommsen, Res Gestae Divi Augusti^ 1883, pp. xlviii. and 
 Ix.) ; conssicravit in J. C. Orelli, Inscr. Led. Select. Ampliss. 
 Collect. (1828), vol. i, p. 158, no. 618; coQisaxravit and cons&cratae 
 sunf^ in J. Gvntev, Inscr. Antiq. Totius Orlis Romani (1602), 
 pp. xviii. no. 6, and dccclxvii. no. 5, respectively; consacrcttis- 
 simo and coinsacraventnt in O. Kellermann, Vigilum Roman- 
 orum Latercula (1835), p. 72 (Appendix), no. 288. 
 
 Similarly the Romance Languages: — From Latin ssicrare come 
 French sa,crcr, Proven^, sagrao; Span, ssigrar, Ital. sdigrare. From 
 Latin (a) cooisecrare, (/3) consecrator, (7) consecrationem come 
 (a) Proven9. consecrar, consegrar, (/9) French consicrateur, (7) 
 French consecration, Proven^, consecracion, Ital. consecrazione. 
 Then later, on the analogy of French sacrcr, Span, sagrar, Ital 
 sagrarc, there have arisen the following forms, shewing (like 
 avaaaKer) an «-vowel instead of the correct e-vowel : French 
 consa^rer,^ Span, consagrar, Ital. cooisacrare, and Span, consa- 
 gracion. 
 
 §§ 4-6. 
 
 §§ 4—6 Another objection brought against my theory by Prof. 
 Conway (in C.R. vol. viii. p. 348) is : " If we are bidden to read 
 the symbol S as equivalent to the four-stroke unrounded ^ 
 of the same two inscriptions, then is it not remarkable that 
 this S should bo used elsewhere with the value /, and only 
 used in these two inscriptions (once beside three examples of | 
 in the one, once beside five examples of ^ in the other) in 
 words in which it may perfectly well be read as/?" 
 
 1 " Al. liic leg. coiis&cratae" Forcellini (ed. J. Bailey, London, 1828), s.v. 
 conaecro. 
 
 - " Coiisacrer : Emprunt^ du lat. ronsecrare, devenu consacrer sous I'mfluence 
 de sacrer " A. Hatzfeld, A. Darmesteter and A. Thomas, Didionnaire Gdn^ral 
 de la Langue Franr^aise (1890, etc.). Part 7, p. 506 b, s.v. conaacrer.
 
 SECOND PAPER 41 
 
 §4 
 
 Contradiction of Prof. Comoays statement that the symbol S 
 is "used elsewhere with the value f" 
 
 Reasons for doubt coneerning the alleged use of the symbol ^ to 
 represent Oscan f in Greek ivriting. 
 
 Arguments to shew that, even assuming the existence of sueh 
 use of a symbol ^, the S of the Oscan words avaSctKer and 
 SecTie? can7iot he this supposed symbol ^. 
 
 It may be observed at once that this rounded symbol S is i 
 not " used elsewhere with the value /." Such a statement (with 
 all due deference to Prof. Conway) is incorrect. 
 
 The word " elsewhere" in Prof. Conway's above-quoted remark 
 {siqyra, p. 40), can only refer to the legend ^EN^EP^ of a set of 
 Oscan coins, which according to Imhoof-Blumer [" Hyria- Veseris 
 (Fenserner) in Kampanien " in the Nitmisma.t. Zeitschr. (Vienna) 
 
 1 The readings ^ENIEP and i^EN^EP, given by certain scholars (see 
 e.g. P. R. Garrucci, Le Monete deW Italia Antica, 1885, part ii. p. 93 ; and 
 cf. also R. S. Poole, Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum, I. Italy, 
 1873, p. 128 ; L. Sambon, Recherches sur les Monnaies de la Presqu' He Italique, 
 1870, p. 163) are rejected as incorrect for any of these coins by Imhoof-Blumer, 
 Numism. Zeitschr, vol. xviii. 1886, pp. 212 n. 12, and 213. 
 
 The reading ^ENIEP given by Poole I.e. as the correct reading of the 
 legend on the particular coin in the British Museum is not thus summarily to 
 be rejected. To prove this, I cannot do better than quote the following com- 
 munication hereon, addressed to me by Mr. E. J. Rapson, of the Department 
 of Coins and Medals in the British Museum (late Fellow of St. John's College, 
 Cambridge). Mr. Rapson writes as follows : "I have examined the coin about 
 which you write, and have also taken the opinions of my colleagues upon it. It 
 is impossible to be certain whether the initial letter is ^ or | ; at the same 
 time there undoubtedly is a trace of something which may be either the top 
 line of I or simply a flaw ^." Mr. Rapson specially authorises me to add 
 that this opinion is shared by Mr. Barclay V. Head, Ph.D., D.C.L., Keeper 
 of the Department of Coins and Medals in the British Museum. 
 
 However, for the sake of argument, we will be content to assume that the 
 correct reading of the legend on the British Museum coin is ^ENIEP, and 
 ■will argue accordingly.
 
 42 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § -i vol, xviii. 1886, pp. 20G sqq.'\ is to be identified with the legend 
 Vl/IQ3^H38^ of another (an isolated-) Oscan coin.^ In suggesting; 
 this identification of ^ with Oscan 8 (=/)/ Imhoof-Blumer {I.e. 
 p. 217) was forced to admit that no other instance was knotun.^ It 
 seems, therefore, that on such very slight evidence it is hardly 
 safe to conclude as a certainty with Prof. Conway (in C.P.S.2\ 
 vol. iii. part iv. p. 222) that these legends " have enriched the 
 Ionic ayS (as used in South Italy) by a new sign ^, a reversed 
 three-stroke sigma" (s?V) "specially used to denote the Oscan/," 
 especially as we actually find Gk. cf) representing Oscan 
 8 {= J) in the Greek inscription of a coin belonging to another 
 Oscan town, by name Fistelia, the obverse of which shows- 
 Greek ct)l^TEAIA, the reverse Oscan ^IV^T^IS (fistluis),. 
 beside the forms n/3T^I8 (fist el), &c., preserved on other coins 
 of the same town ; cf, H. Dressel in Curtius, Histor. und Philol. 
 A'lcfsdtzc (1884), p. 256, and Zvetaieff I.I.LI). (1886) No. 261, 
 p. 78 and (Glossarium, s.v. Fistlus) p. 108.*^ 
 
 ^ It can luuilly be said witli truth that the initial letter of this coin-legend 
 is altogether clear, at least as photographed for Imhoof-Blumer in the Num. 
 Zeit. vol. xviii. Taf. V. no. 13. We will, however, assume as correct that it is 8- 
 
 Whatever be the correct initial letter, the word itself appears to be a gen. 
 plur. : see Zvetaieff, /./ I.D. (jllossarium, p. 107. 
 
 2 See Prof. Conway in C.P.S.T. vol iii. part iv. 1892, p. 222, n. 4. 
 
 •^ Of these coins — which, according to Imhoof-Blumer, l.r., and Prof. Conway 
 in C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 222, belong to the town Veseris — mentioni 
 was made in C.Jx. viii. p. 198 ( = sivpra, p. 5). 
 
 ■• As a matter of strict fact Imhoof-Blumer's actual suggestion is that the ^ 
 represents "/oder w" ; but Prof. Conway (/.'■. p. 222) holds definitely tof&s 
 the correct transliteration of the ^. 
 
 •'"' The absolute untenability, on the otlier hand, of the two arguments by 
 which Imhoof-Blumer sought to prove that the ^ of ^EN^EP " wird nicht 
 als Sigma aufzufassen sein" [I.e. pp. 216-217, cited ivfra, p. 49) will at once 
 appear from a glance at § 5, ivfra pp. 49-,')3. Note especially the inscriptional 
 ^OXOID^ : Hoxoh and OAYIEVk^ : 'OSuo-eiJs there cited (p. 52), etc. 
 
 " It may be observed that in C.P.S.T., l.r., pp. 222 sqq., and C.R. viii. p. 
 348, Prof. Conway has (wittingly or unwittingly) abstained from making any 
 mention whatever of these Fistelian coins.
 
 SECOND PAPER 43 
 
 Let us for a moment consider the chronology of the above- § 4r 
 
 mentioned coins : — 
 
 (1) According to Imhoof-Bhimer {I.e.) and Prof. Conway 
 {I.e.) the earlier name of Fensernum/ which these scholars 
 identify with Veseris,^ near Mount Vesuvius, was Hyria ^ ; the 
 date of the extant coins of Hyria, according to Imhoof-Blumer 
 (/.c. p. 206, followed by Prof. Conway in C.P.S.T., I.e., p. 224), is 
 450-350 B.C. ; therefore Hyria did not become Fensernum till 
 after 350 B.C.; therefore no Greek symbol to represent Oscan 8 
 was needed for this town till after 350 B.C. ; therefmx the symbol 
 ^, s%i]}]}oscd to represent Oscan 8, could not have hccn invented for 
 this tovm till after 350 B.C.* 
 
 But, on the other hand, 
 
 (2) The graves found in the necropolis of ' la conca d'oro ' 
 near the ancient Samnitic Allifae,^ which have yielded, amongst 
 others, coins of Fistelia — [which Dressel, I.e., has conclusively 
 proved to be (not, as was once believed, Puteoli, but) a town 
 lying between the Samnitic towns Allifae and Telesia *^] — one of 
 which, as said above, shows the Greek form with (p parallel to- 
 the native Oscan 8, belong to the pre-Koman period, i.e. before- 
 354 B.C.'' (c£ Dressel, I.e.); therefore the symbol dp to represent 
 Oscan 8 is established for the Oscan tovan Fistelia before 350 B.C. 
 
 ^ This name Fensernum — or, more strictlj^ Fensernl^l — is vouched for by 
 the above-mentioned legend VMQ3\M38 (written in the native Oscan 
 characters), pi'ondtd that the initial letter of this legend is really 8 . See p. 
 42, note 1, -mpra. ^ Vid. siq^ra p. 5, and p. 42, n. 3. 
 
 ^ Assuming for the purposes of the argument that these scholars are right 
 in identifying these three places, I have marked them in the map as one, 
 namely ' Hyria-Fensernum-Veseris '. See facing p. 44. 
 
 * Neither apparently could it have long been needed for Fensernum, 
 seeing that "the to-wn must have been destroyed or deserted very soon 
 after" 340 b.c. (Prof. Comvay in C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. p. 226). 
 
 ^ The modern Alife. " See map facing p. 44. 
 
 '' League between Rome and Samnium, 354 B.C.; outbreak of first Samnite 
 War, .343 B.C.
 
 44 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 4 Thus then it is proved that the Osci of Fistelia represented 
 Oscan 8 in Greek writing by 4) before 350 B.C., i.e. before the 
 earliest possible ^ date of any Fensernum coin. Consequently 
 it is difficult to see why a new symbol ^ should have been 
 required by Fensernum to represent in Greek writing the same 
 sound as was already represented by cp. 
 
 But it may be said that what is true of the Osci of Fistelia 
 is not therefore necessarily true of the Osci of Fensernum, who 
 may not have known the symbol cp, and were not likely to have 
 much communication with a mountain-town of Samnium, 
 whence they might have got it. But the following facts (the 
 significance of which may be readily estimated by a glance at 
 the accompanying map -) will not admit of such a view : — 
 
 (1) In the above-mentioned necropolis of ' la conca d'oro ' 
 near Allifae have been found a coin of Hyria itself (the earlier 
 name of Fensernum according to Imhoof-Blumer and Prof. 
 Conway, v. supra), AUiban coins, a coin of Neapolis, possibly also 
 of Cumae, besides coins of Fistelia and Al(l)ifae (cf Dressel, I.e. 
 pp. 249-251), Alliban and Fistelian coins have been found 
 together in the neighbourhood of Neapolis, which is only eleven 
 miles from Vesuvius (cf. Dressel, I.e. p. 251, and J. Friedliinder, 
 Osk. Miinz., 1850, p. 25). Also coins of Fistelia have been found 
 in the necropolis of Capua (cf Dressel, I.e. p. 254). And more- 
 over there exist coins of Hyria, Nola, Cumae, Al(l)ifae, and 
 Fistelia, all showing the head of Athene with an owl on the 
 olive-twig in the helmet {see Imhoof-Blumer, I.e. pp. 207, 208). 
 These facts sufficiently prove the frequency of intercommuni- 
 cation, so that even from this point of view we should have 
 
 1 * Earliest possible ' on Inihoof-Blumer's and Prof. Conway's own shewing, 
 V. supra p. 43. - Facing Ihis page.
 
 
 < 
 
 H 
 a.' 
 
 13 
 
 I— I 
 
 O 
 H
 
 SECOND PAPER 45 
 
 expected to find Oscan / represented in Greek writing by cj) § 4 
 on coinage of Fensernum as on that of Fistelia. 
 
 (2) Hyria-Fensernum, if identical with Veseris near Vesuvius, 
 can only have been about twenty miles distant from the great 
 Greek colony Cumae, which certainly had (p in its alphabet, cf, 
 e.g. C.I.G. 8337 <p, C.I.G. 32 and Add. © (see E. S. Roberts, 
 Introdtidion to Greek Ejiigraphy, Part i. 1887, § 83, Nos. 173, 
 174, p. 201). Hence, from this point of view as well, it is not 
 unreasonable to conclude that Fensernum would, like Fistelia, 
 have represented its / in Greek writing by cj5. It becomes, 
 therefore, increasingly difficult to see why we are to attribute 
 to the people of Fensernum the invention of a new and quite 
 unnecessary /-symbol ^} which, as Imhoof-Blumer himself 
 admitted {v. supra p. 42), has been found nowhere else. 
 
 Let us, however, for the sake of argument, assume that 
 Fensernum invented a special symbol ^ to transliterate the 
 Oscan 8 in Greek (i.e. in other words, that the reading 
 ^EN^EP = *Fenser^). Yet even so it cannot be considered that 
 we are thereby enabled — even ' graphically ' speaking — to 
 regard the S of T3)1ASAHA and 33B3S (or rather >3ITnS, v. 
 supra, p. 6 nn. 2 and 3) as this /-symbol ^, for the following 
 reasons : — 
 
 (]) Whereas the ^ of ^ENIEP (thus supposed to mean 
 Fenser) is carefully stamped with distinct straight strokes (see 
 Numismat. Zeitschr., I.e. Table of Plates, V.), the disputed 
 
 ^ What Prof. Conway in C.R. viii. 1894, p. 348 means by calling ^^ " a dis- 
 carded form of the symbol of a similar sound" {i.e. of a sound similar to/) 
 it is not easy to see. Nor is such an explanation consistent with his earlier 
 statement in C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 222 (quoted in the text, 
 supra, p. 42). 
 
 2 Such could hardly be the meaning of a legend |EN ^EP, on the possibility 
 of the existence of which see siqjva p. 41, n. 1.
 
 46 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 4 letter in our two inscriptions is a very distinctly rounded S 
 (see the facsimiles given in the present work ^) ; and further, as 
 was pointed out in C.B. viii. p. 199,^ if in oiir two inscriptions 
 the engraver had intended to write the (to say the least 
 of it) very uncommon symbol ^ {i.e. the supposed new symbol 
 ^ =1 f) written retrograde, as Prof. Conway suggests, it is 
 strange that this new symbol should be so inexactly formed, 
 considering how accurately I is cut each time that it occurs. 
 It would seem that if in our two inscriptions the engraver had 
 intended to use a newly coined sign ^ to represent Oscan /, he 
 would have engi'aved it carefully and exactly; whereas, if we 
 regard our S ^s an s, we are supported by the frequency with 
 which the rounded S ( = s) appears on inscriptions beside the 
 more carefully written 5, ^, or Z.^ 
 
 ^ Vid. supra, opposite pp. 4 and 8. 
 
 2 = pp. 8 and 9, snjjra. 
 
 3 A carehfis reader might perhaps at first sight imagine that a certain form 
 E n 8 Z O N occurring beside E c|) O Z O N in F. Blass, Pronunciation of 
 Ancient Greek,^ % 28, p. (Engl. ed. 1890) 107, 1. 2, is calculated to support 
 Prof. Conway's (in my opinion unsupportable) view concerning the S of the 
 Oscan ^3|T^3S a"^^ T3>1ASAHA- in other words, such reader might 
 perhaps imagine that the g of the above-mentioned EFT 80 SO N is an/ / 
 
 !Such illusion would be dispelled by a more careful reading of the passage 
 in question and by a reference to the actual authorities cited by Blass, 
 I.e., namely: C. R. Lepsius, Standard Alphabet for reducing umvritten lan- 
 gvxiges and foreign graphic systems to a uniform orthography in European 
 letters^- 1863, pp. 2{)^ sqq.; M. G. Schwartze, Kojitisrhe Grammatil; 1850, pp. 
 79 sqq.; and L. Stern, Koj/fische Grammatik, 1880, pp. 6, 7, 8, 16 sq., 406 sq. 
 
 The forms cited above from Blass (I. c. ) occur also in Stern, op. cit. p. 407, 
 where they are written effSOCOH ecj^OCOH. 
 
 The language in which these forms occur is the Coptic, or, as it is also 
 called, ' Egyptian Christian ' (see Blass, oj). cit., p. 106 ; and siij)ra p. 28, n. 3). 
 
 The word itself represents the Greek €>' oaov with the meaning ' wahrend, 
 so lange als' (Stern, op. cit., pp. 406 sq.). It is in fact one of " die Griechis- 
 chen Conjunctionen, mit welchen der Koptische Text Boheirischen wie Sahi- 
 dischcn Dialects die zeitliclien Verhaltniszsiitze einzuleiten liebt" (Stern, I.e., 
 p. 406». 
 
 Beside eFFgOCOH (:6c|)0C0H) representing Gk. eV '6<tov, we have
 
 SECOND PAPER- 47 
 
 (2) The siipposed newly-coined /-symbol ^, beside the above- §4 
 recorded^ earlier transhteration of Oscan/ by ^, would not be 
 likely to have been so widely used as to reach Bruttii, the home 
 of our two inscriptions (see ZvetaiefF, I.I.I.D. pp. 74-76, and Prof. 
 Conway in G.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv, 1892, p. 223). Nor indeed 
 can it be maintained that the Greek symbol dp was unknown 
 
 •also (with the same meaning) gOCOH representing Gk. '6a ov (Stern, I.e., p. 
 407 ; cf. also Blass, op. cit., p. 94, 11. 5-7). 
 
 "Die Koptische Sprache," writes Stern, o^j. cif., p. 6, "wird mit 31 Buch- 
 staben geschrieben, von denen 6 der Hieroglyphischen oder Demotischen 
 Schrift entlehnt, die iibrigen mit Einschluss einer Ligatur die Griechischen 
 sind." 
 
 One of the six "nicht Griechischen Buchstaben" just referred to, which (in 
 the words of Stern, op. cit., p. 7) "sind den folgenden Hieroglyphen und 
 Demotischen Zeichen (p. 7) nachgebildet," is the symbol under discussion, 
 namely 6 (Stern, I.e.). 
 
 The name of this Coptic g is hori (Schwartze, op. cit., p. 91) or huri (Stern, 
 I.e.). Its value is that of the spiritus asper, namely h. (See Lepsius, op. cit., 
 Schwartze, o]). cit., Stern, op. cit., and Blass, op. cit., I.e. and p. 94). 
 
 Besides Y\2 (l^^)^ Coptic shews us also K8 ^^'^ T8 , all three simply 
 representing "the combination of tenuis with /i" (Blass, op. eit., p. 107), and 
 standing respectively for </>, X: ^j that is to say, for (to use the words of Lep- 
 sius, op. cit., p. 202) "the aspirated sounds " ^j + /i, k + h, t + h. See Blass I.e. 
 and especially also Lepsius I.e. 
 
 Two points have now been made quite clear concerning the 8 of 
 e n 80 C O H (beside £ cf) C O H ) : ( 1 ) that the 8 is not a Greek letter at all, 
 but an Egyptian letter, (2) that it represents {not/, hut) h. 
 
 Consequently it is obvious that the illusion of our hypothetically ' careless 
 reader ' must rudely be dispelled. 
 
 To render assurance doubly sure, I forwarded to Prof. Blass himself a copy 
 of the present note (together with a summary of the main points of the present 
 section, pp. 41 sqq. ). I asked him (1 ) whether herein I had correctly represented 
 his views as given in his Pronunciation of Ancient Greek'^, I.e., and (2) whether 
 he thought it possible for any reasoning scholar to draw from the use of this 
 Egjrptian symbol 2 any argument in support of Prof. Conway's view on the 3 
 of the Oscan words >3IT^3S ^^'^^ T3>IASAI/1A. 
 
 The Professor's reply is conclusive: — 
 
 "You have represented my meaning quite rightly. I should think that 
 there was not a shadow of a rational argument to be derived from this Coptic 
 mode of spelling. . . . The o in GFISOCOH isan^... This 8 is moreover 
 {not a Greek, but) an Egyptian letter. . . . There cannot be any connection 
 between this Egyptian letter and the S of Oscan >3IT^3S and T3>IASAMA-" 
 
 ^ Supra pp. 42-44.
 
 48 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § "i in Bruttii, and that therefore some other symbol must have 
 been devised to represent Oscan /; for we actually find it 
 preserved on the coins of Thurii, which lies on the borderland 
 between Lucania^ and Bruttii, and on those of Terina, an 
 Achaean colony on the West coast of Bruttii (see Imhoof- 
 Blumer, I.e. p. 220, and Sambon, Becherchcs, PI. xxiii. 20, and 
 esp. R. S. Poole, ' Athenian Coin-Engravers in Italy,' in The 
 Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd series, vol. iii. 1883, pp. 269-277, 
 Plates xi., xii.), coins of 443-400 B.C. cirea (see Poole, ^.c). 
 Hence, as in the case of the above-mentioned coin of Fistelia, 
 we should certainly have expected 4) to be used also here to 
 transliterate the/, had these disputed words really been *ai>a- 
 faK€T and *Fe<TTLe<i (cf. ^rja-ro^, the transliteration of Lat. 
 Festus, cited by Prof. Conway in G.P.S.T. vol. iii. p. 223, n. 2). 
 
 Remark. — Before leaving the present section, it may be well to observe 
 that : — 
 
 Even if it could be, as (I venture to think) it has certainly not yet been, 
 proved : — (i) That the Osci of Fensernum, notwithstanding the above- 
 proved 2 " frequency of intercommunication " between Fistelia and the 
 Campanian towns, including Hyria (the earlier name of Fensernum itself^), 
 and notwithstand'mg also the actual co-existence of (f> in the alphabet of the 
 neighbouring Cumae,* nevertheless did actually invent and make use of a 
 new and quite unnecessary symbol ^, to transliterate in Greek writing the 
 very same letter^ which the Osci of Fistelia already transliterated by 
 Greek <^;® — (ii) That this alleged /-symbol ^.^ formed by three distinct 
 straight strokes, could, when reversed, be represented by a distinctly 
 
 ^ That Biicheler regards <p as in use among the Osci of Lucania (as well as 
 among the Osci of Fistelia) to transliterate their Oscan g (= /) into Greek is 
 proved by his correction Fa\f(p [= Osc. *rakf (= Lat. valens ; cf. Osc. 
 uittiuf, 'usio, iisus,' from *-iOns, Brugmann, Grundr., Eng. Ed., vol. iii. 
 § 192)] for foAe, in the Titulus Dianensis (Zvetaieff, I.I.I.D. p. 74, No. 236 
 and note ad loc. ). 
 
 - Supra, p. 44. 
 
 * According to Imhoof-Blumer and Prof. Conway. See above, p. 43. 
 
 •• See supra, p. 45. ^ Namely, /. "^ See supra, pp. 42-44.
 
 SECOND PAPER 49 
 
 rounded 3 ; — and (iii) That this alleged /-symbol, ^^ was so widely used § 5 
 as to reach Bruttii, the home of our two inscriptions ; ^ 
 
 Even so, it by no means follows that the S ^^ our two inscriptions could 
 be regarded as exemplifying this supposed /-symbol. For it would still 
 remain to be proved that T3)1ASAI/1A and )3|T^3S ^^^ words in which 
 the S " may perfectly well be read as /" and that the thus postulated 
 *Festies and *anafa'ket are "perfectly good Oscan words" — two statements 
 made by Prof. Conway in C.R. vol. viii., p. 348, for a detailed discussion 
 of which see § 6 infra. 
 
 § 5. 
 
 (1) Inscriptions shewing Sigma written in a different direction 
 to the rest of the inscription. 
 
 (2) Inscriptions shewing two different kinds of Sigma (a) in 
 the same sentence, (b) in the same word, in some cases one Sigma 
 being reversed. 
 
 Imhoof-Blumer, in discussing the coin-legend ^ENIEP,^ says § ^ 
 
 (I.e. pp. 216, 217) : " Da nicht anzunehmen ist, dass hier 
 
 in demselben Worte der Buclistabe Sigma durcb zwei ver- 
 
 schiedene Zeichen ausgedriickt werden wollte, das einemal 
 
 * durch die griechische Form | und das andere durch die oskische 
 
 ^ (fiir welche zudem, weil die Schrift rechtlaufig, 5 stehen 
 
 sollte), so wird eben ^ auch nicht als Sigma aufzufassen sein";^ 
 
 and Prof, Conway, C.JR. viii. p. 848, seems to imply that he sees 
 
 an objection to my theory in the fact that (a) in one and the 
 
 same inscription, (h) in one and the same word, there should be 
 
 two kinds of Sigma. I may mention, further, that an eminent 
 
 student of the Italic Dialects, imagining the appearance of two 
 
 kinds of Sigma in one and the same word to be an unparalleled 
 
 phenomenon, has privately intimated to me that he considers 
 
 this a "crux" in my way. 
 
 1 See ZvetaiefF and Prof. Conway cited snpra, pp. 3 (text and n. 4) and 5 
 (text and n. 4). ^ Hereon see snpra, pp. 41-45. 
 
 3 This is the passage already referred to on p. 42, n. 5. 
 
 E
 
 50 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 5 Inasmuch as such views, if not refuted, would condemn my 
 interpretation of the S of T3>1ASAHA and )3IT^3S,^ I may not 
 let them pass uncriticised. 
 
 (1) The objection to the writing of the S in a different 
 direction to the rest of the inscription can be easily refuted. 
 As was remarked in C.B. vol. viii. p. 200,^ "According to 
 A. Fabretti, Falaeographische Stiidien (1877), § 104, p. 82, there 
 is no Greek letter which takes a different direction to the rest 
 of the inscription so often as ^ and $. 5 is the form that 
 ought strictly to be written where the inscription runs from 
 left to right, ^ where it runs from right to left." 
 
 Instances of wrong direction of Sigma are numerous in 
 Greek : — 
 
 ^ or 8 for ^ or S : C.I.a. 28, 7402, 7557, 7675, 7686, 7687, 
 7737, and Rhein. Mus. xxii. (1867), Nos. 34, 58, 61, 62, 88, 105, 
 135, 144, 167, 173, 206. ^ for j; : Archdol. Zeitung v. 145, and 
 Imhoof-Blumer and Otto Keller, Tier- tmcL Pfianzenhilder, Taf 
 iii. No. 27. ^ or S for ^ or 8: C.I.G. 31, 7559&, 7582, 7642, 7665, 
 7667, 7679, 7711, 7747, and Bhcin. 3fus. xxii. No. 18. Both $ 
 and ^ in the same inscription : C.I.G. 11. Both $ and ^ in the 
 same word : C.I.G. 74755, 7618, and Bhein. Mus. xxii. Nos. 230, 
 245. Both t and ^ in the same word : Roehl, Inscr. Graec. 
 Antiqitiss. (1882), No. 335.3 
 
 Turning to Italy we find the same thing : — 
 (a) Etruscan : of ^ for <> Fabretti {Pal. Skid. § 107, p. 85) 
 quotes five instances, thirty-five of $ for ^, nineteen of S for 8, 
 and three of ^ and ^ together, (h) Italia Superior: — ^ or 8 
 
 1 ^3IT^3S ("ot ^3T^3S) must now on Dr. von Planta's authority (\ad. 
 supra p. 6, nn. 2 and 3) be considered the correct reading. 
 
 ^ — supra, p. 14. 
 
 3 Roehl 335 = E. S. Roberts, Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, part i. 1887, 
 No. 309, p. 307.
 
 SECOND PAPER 51 
 
 for $ or S : GJ.L 37, 50, 54. $ or S for ^ or 8 : GJ.I. 12, 28, § 5 
 30, 42, 49 (this last is incorrectly printed ' 40 ' in Fabretti, 
 Pal. Stud. § 108, p. 85), 60. Both <, and ^ in the same 
 inscription : C.I.I. 21 (which shows incorrect $ and correct ^ 
 four times each), 22 (showing ^ correct once, incorrect once, ^ 
 incorrect once), {c) The Marrucini, C.I.I. 2848 (= Zvetaiefif 
 I.I.I.B. No. 7), the forms ^ or ^ occur eleven times (^ correct 
 thrice, ^ incorrect four times, ^ correct four times), v. W. Deecke 
 in Appendix to Zvetaieff, I.e. p. 175 ; Picenum, C.II. 2682 
 (= Zvetaieff, I.e. No. 4), | twice (correct once, incorrect once) 
 beside W (twice) and AA, v. Deecke, I.e. p. 174 ; Marsi, 
 Zvetaiefif, I.e. No. 45, 5 correct once, incorrect once, md. 
 Deecke, I.e. p. 178 ; Falisci, Zvetaieff, I.e. No. 54, ^ incorrect 
 once. 
 
 It is unnecessary to go on multiplying examples ; but it may 
 be well to note, d propos of Imhoof-Blumer's above-quoted 
 remark on the direction of the symbol ^ in the coin-legend 
 ^ENIEP, that the two instances of " ^ for | " mentioned among 
 the Greek examples given above (namely, jKIH : 'Scionae,' 
 OPPH)KI0M\: 'of the Orreskioi') occur on coins, and that further 
 instances of ^ or 8 for ^ or S on eoins of Italy are to be found 
 in Fabretti, Pal. Stud. § 109, p. 86. 
 
 (2) Having thus given evidence to show that wrong direction 
 of Sigma is by no means rare, we may pass on to give, more 
 especially, instances where two different kinds of Sigma are 
 found («) in the same inseriiotion, and (h) (in order that I may 
 prove my explanation of ) 3 IT ^38) in the same word. In several 
 of the following examples it will be noticed further that 
 the two Sigmas, besides differing in form, dififer also in 
 direction : — 
 
 E 2
 
 52 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 §5 Greek inscriptions: C.LG. 41 [$ and i (= i), both in the 
 same word, the direction of both being correct], 43 [| and ^ 
 (the direction of both being correct), not in the same word], 7697 
 [OAYIEVt^ : 'OSuo-ey?, i correct direction, ^ incorrect, both in the- 
 same word]. E. S. Roberts, Introd^tction to Greek Epigra'phy, Part 
 i. 1887, No. 69, p. 93 [T0X50TAI : 4)F>tNOI = ro^oTai-. 
 ^^pvvo^'l ; No, 276, p. 277 [three-stroke sigma (correct direction) 
 and four-stroke sigma (incorrect direction), both in the same 
 word]. Roehl, Inscrr. Graec. Antiquiss 62 [2, | (correct), ^ 
 (incorrect), not in the same word], 68a [AvTO^ . . . ANEAE^®0 : 
 avro<i . . . aveKetrOo)], 160 [| (correct), 5 (correct), not in the 
 same Avord], 284 [EKKTE1.E^ANTI[>I0NY50I : iK{K)Te\eaavri 
 Atwi^ycrrt)], 828 [showing $ once, beside five examples of |, 
 which, it will be observed, is exactly the proportion of the 
 rounded S to ^ in our avaaaKer inscription], 362 [| (correct), 
 $ (con-ect), not in the same word], 407 [^OXO^D^ : e^oxo<;, 
 ^ incorrect, ^ correct, both in the same word^], 471 [^ (correct), 
 5 (correct), not in the same word-], 483 [(B)r(B)^ANAPO^ | 
 ^BAAO| nAIII<(A)Bl : 'H77;crazy8po9 (8)a\rj^ UaaiKXij^i (three 
 names written one under the other, shewing ^ correct thrice, 
 $ correct once, ^ correct once; both ^ and <> together in the 
 same word)]. 
 
 Turning again to Italy : — 
 
 Of Etruscan inscriptions we may cite C.LI. 803 [8 (twice), 
 ^ M], 1897 U, M], 2261 [^ ^, t (twice)], 2.561 [$, ^], 2568 ter 
 « [8, S, ^], 2577 his [^ (twice), ^]; from Italia Superior we 
 may quote C.I.I. 60 [$ (twice), m] ; from Picenum, Zvetaieff, 
 I.I.I.D. No. 1 [^ thrice (correct), I thrice (correct), cC four times 
 (correct), two instances of i and one of < occurring together 
 
 1 Roehl, 407 = Roberts, oj). cit., No. 25, p. 65. 
 ^ Roehl, 471 = Roberts, op. cit.. No. 5, p. 29.
 
 SECOND PAPER 53 
 
 in the same word], vid. Deecke, Appendix to Zvetaieflf, oi^. § 5 
 cit. p. 173; from the Marrucini, C.LI. 2848 (= ZvetaiefF, I.e. 
 No. 7) [the forms ^ or ^^ occur eleven thnes, AA or W five 
 times ; W and ^ occvn- together in the proper name ' Leusius/ 
 V. Deecke, I.e. p. 175] ; from Messapia, C.I.I. 2948 [S 
 (thrice), ^ ; Z and S occur in the same word], 2960 [^ (twice), 
 t^ and an apparently mutilated form of Z (twice); ^ and i 
 and the mutilated Z, all in the same word], 2989, corresponding 
 to Mommsen, Untcr-Ital. Dial. Tab. iv. [| and $ in the same 
 word]. 
 
 These examples are, I think, sufficient proof that no objection 
 can be brought against my view on the ground (1) that the 
 S is written in a different direction to the rest of the two 
 inscriptions, or (2) that it is differently formed from the other 
 sigmas, even (in the case of Scstics) in the same word. 
 
 §6. 
 
 (1) Objections to Prof. Comvay's postidated *anafaket. 
 
 (2) Doitbt concerning Prof. Conway's -postulated *Festies. 
 
 Prof Conway, in C.Ph. vol. viii. p. 348, states as a fact that § 6 
 T3>IASA1/1A and )3IT^3S are words in which the S " may perfectly 
 well be read as/," and adds {ib., ad fin.) " that both Festics and 
 anafahet are perfectly good Oscan words." Let us consider the 
 truth of these statements : — 
 
 (1) The postulated ^anafahet. 
 
 (a) The bare and unsupported statements which Prof. 
 Conway has thus made in favour of his own theory that 
 T3)^ASAHA should be read anafaket are no answer whatever to
 
 54 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § fi the strong objection which I brought against that theory in 
 C.R. viii. p. 199.1 
 
 Prof. Conway should at least have brought some evidence from 
 Italic to show that/aao in composition can mean ' offer, dedicate.' 
 
 He has brousrht no such evidence. He has not even ventured 
 to reassert his attempted translation (' the dedicated chine ') of 
 the much discussed Umbr. klavlaf aanfehtaf {Ted). Ig. 
 ii. A 38) — the only shred of evidence which he was able to 
 produce in his original essay {C.P.S.T. vol. iii. p. 223). It is,^ 
 perhaps, as well that he did not reassert it ; for Umbr. 
 aanfehtaf does not mean ' dedicated.' ^ Its true meaning is 
 something quite different. See the note hereunder.^ 
 
 ^ = pp. 8-9, Hnpra. - Cf. C.R. viii. p. 199 (= p. 9, .s?/;»-a). 
 
 ' [So far as the word klavlaf is concerned, reference may be made to the 
 above-mentioned Essay on The Establishment and Extension of the Laio of 
 Thumeysen ami Havet (in the A.J. P. vol. xvii. 1896), § 7, p. 183, n. 2, where 
 I have given reasons to prove that this word does not mean ' chine ' at all, 
 but rather 'pieces broken off,' here 'pieces of meat, sacrificial portions.'] 
 
 The meaning of aanfehtaf may be elucidated from a gloss of Philoxe- 
 nus on rudus: "XaA./cbs avipyaaros rudus." Cf. also Festus s.v. rodns, p. 265 
 Miill. : " liodus vel raudus " (of wliich rudus is another form, the weak grade 
 of the ablaut being preserved in rudis, see Lindsay, The Lat. Language, 
 ch. iv. § 41) " signifcat rem rudem et imperfectam...in aestimatione censoria 
 aes infectum rudus appellatur.^^ 
 
 In the same way aanfehtaf here = ' infectas ' (the translation given by 
 Biicheler, Umbrica, 1883, p. 202, and Brugmann, Grundr. vol. i. § 502) in the 
 sense of 'rudis, avepyacrros.^ Cf. argentiim infectum, (Livy 34, 10, 4), aurum 
 infectum (Verg. Aen. 10, 528), rudis atqne infecta materies (Petr. 114). And 
 for the opposite cf. argenlnm factum (Livy 26, 16 and Cic. Verr. 4, 18), aurum 
 factum (Verg. Aen. 10, 527). 
 
 Thus klavlaf aanfehtaf together = ' broken portions which have not 
 been dressed, broken pieces in their normal (i.e. un-prepared, un-dressed, 
 un-cooked) state.' 
 
 Not only is this meaning perfectly suitable to the context, but its correct- 
 ness would appear conclusively proved by the fact (whereon see Biicheler, 
 Umbr. p. 145, note) that 'prepared' is the unquestionable meaning of Umbr. 
 feta ('facta' the ?io?i-negatived past-pple) in the phrase vistisa feta 
 ' vesticia facta, with prepared libation' {Tab. Ig. II. B. 13). 
 
 Thus we have the convincing proportion : — Lat. fart urn : Lat. infectum = 
 Umbr. f e t a (' facta ') : Umbr. aanfehtaf ('infectas').
 
 SECOND PAPER 55 
 
 In Oscan, so far as our records go, we never find the ? '' 
 verb, even ivhen ibncompounded, used with any such meaning 
 as * offer, sacrifice, dedicate.' Umbrian and Latin,^ however, 
 use the uncompounded verb — but the uncompounded verb 
 only — with some such meaning: e.g. (for Umbrian), Tab. Ig. 
 i. A, 3, tre buf fetu ( = 'tres boves facito'); Tab. Ig. i. b, 
 24, apruf feitu (= ' apros facito'); Tab. Ig. vi. A, 58, 59, 
 persae fetu, arvio fetu, pone fettt ( = ' pedarias facito, arvia facito, 
 posca facito'), etc. {v. Biicheler, Umbrica, p. 207, s.v. fakust). 
 For Latin cf. the following : Cicero, pro Balbo, ch. 24 § 55 (sacra 
 pro eivibus faccre), Verr. 2. 4. 8. § 18, Brutus, 14, § 56 ; and 
 Vergil, Bel. iii. 77 (faeiam vitula pro frugibus), Colum. 2. 22. 4, 
 Tibullus, iv. 6. 14; and Cicero, ^^^. i. 13. 3 {cum pro populo 
 fieret), ad Brut. ep. 15, Mur. 41, § 90, Livy, xxxvii. 3. 5. 
 
 It is a matter of extreme doubt whether even uncompounded 
 the verb could be used either in Latin or Umbrian for 
 ' dedicating ' such a thing as a helmet (the meaning attributed 
 by Prof. Conway to his postulated comp)Ound ^avafaKer). 
 
 This latter question, however, does not call for consideration 
 here. 
 
 In considering the postulated compound *avafaKeT, it is 
 sufficient to show (as has been shown) that there is no Italic 
 evidence whatsoever for the assumption that the meaning ' to 
 dedicate ' ever attaches to the root fac- when in composition. 
 
 (b) Whereas my theory of borrowing explains at once " das 
 scheinbar nicht apokopierte ana in avacraKer " (Buck, Voc. der 
 OsJc. Sp)r. p. 15), the explanation, suggested with considerable 
 hesitation by Dr. von Planta {Gramm. d. Umbr.-Osk. Dial. vol. i. 
 p. 518, reading avaaaKer) and accepted by Prof. Conway (in 
 C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. p. 223, n. 3, and in C.R. viii. p. 348, 
 
 1 Cf. C.R. viii. p. 199 [= supra, pp. 8 {adfin.)-^].
 
 56 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 6 reading avafaKer), namely, that ana- is here for an-ad-, seems 
 very unsatisfactory. 
 
 (c) Prof. Conway's derivation of the supposed *anafahct from 
 '*an-ad-faket impKes that in Oscan a verb could be combined 
 with two prepositions ; this may possibly have been the case, 
 but at any rate there does not exist a single other instance of 
 this phenomenon in Oscan, nor can I find a single example in 
 Umbrian. 
 
 (rf) The Latin form corresponding to the thus postulated 
 *an-ad-faTiet would, according to Prof. Conway {C.B. viii. p. 348), 
 be *inaffccit. It is well worthy of note, however, as militating 
 against Prot. Conway's view, that this particular prepositional 
 combination in + ad + mrh does not occur even in Latin till 
 quite late, and then only in the aira^ Xey. inaccresco ' increase ' 
 found in Tertullian (160*— 240* a.d). 
 
 In the face of these objections it seems to me that it is 
 rather bold to state as a "fact" that the S of T3>1ASA!/1A " may 
 perfectly well be read as /," and that the supposed ^anafahct 
 is a " perfectly good Oscan word." 
 
 (2) The postulated *Fcsties. 
 
 That Fcsties might be a "perfectly good Oscan word" I am 
 not concerned to deny, but this is no argument whatever against 
 the equally good Oscan word Scsties. In C.B. viii. p. 199^ I 
 endeavoured to show that Prof. Conway's explanation of 
 )3T^3S by ' Festus' (as against my explanation ' Sestus, Sexhts ' ^) 
 was neither " necessary " nor " likely " ; and it seems to me that 
 his similar explanation of (the true reading^) )3IT^3S by 'Fesfius' 
 is still less likely. ' Sestius, Sextms' the explanation which 
 
 ' =p. 8, supra. ^ For the at = xt, see the First Paper, supra p. 6, n. 1. 
 
 3 Vid. supra, p. 6, nn. 2 and 3.
 
 SECOND PAPER 57 
 
 commends itself to me, is a far commoner name than ' Festius,' § 6 
 of which, after a careful search, I have only been able to find 
 three instances, viz. Z. Fcstms Primus (Brambach, Corp. In- 
 scriptionum Bhcnanarum, No. 41), hencmerenti Festio patri 
 {G.I.L. iii. 1852), Papinia Fcsstia (sic) (C.I.L. iii. 2565). I have 
 it on Dr. von Planta's authority that there is not a single 
 instance of Fcstms in C.I.L. vols. ix. and x. ; I cannot find a 
 single instance of it in G. Wilmanns' copious indices of Nomina 
 and Cognomina to his collection of 2885 Exempla Inscrijjtiomcm 
 Latinarutn (Berlin, 1873); and, moreover, neither Fcstus itself 
 nor Fcstms occur at all in the Glossarium Italicum of Fabretti's 
 C.I.I. I do not of course resjard these facts as a conclusive 
 proof that my explanation of )3IT^3S is correct, but at any rate 
 they support it very strongly, while they certainly militate 
 against Prof Conway's view. 
 
 Remarlc. — Witli the conclusion of tlie present section the case against 
 Prof. Conway's explanation of T3)IASAHA and ^3IT^3S is completed. 
 
 The objections to Prof. Conway's view have ranged themselves naturally 
 under two distinct heads, to each of which a separate section has been 
 devoted: — (1) In § 4 Prof. Conway's statement that "the symbol S" is 
 "used elsewhere with the value/" was directly denied (p. 41) ; doubt was 
 thrown on the alleged use at Fensernum of the symbol ^ to rei:)resent in 
 Greek writing the Oscan/ (pp. 41-45) ; and further, assuming for the sake 
 of argument that such a symbol ^ was so nsed at Fensernum, it was argued 
 that even so the S of T3>IASAI/1A and >31T^3S could not be this symbol 
 ^ (pp. 45 sq.) (ii) The present section (§ 6) has been devoted to the 
 arguments against the acceptability of Prof. Conway's postulated *anafaket 
 and *Festies (considered each on its own merits, quite apart from any con- 
 sideration, of the question — discussed in § 4 — whether the symbol S could 
 by any possibility represent/). 
 
 It is ob\-ious that, unless and until the various arguments against Prof. 
 Conway's view — not only those advanced in the present section, but those 
 also which were advanced in § 4 — can be refuted, neither Prof. Conway's 
 postulated *anafal:et nor his postulated *Festies can be held to come even 
 *■ within the sphere of practical politics.' 
 
 Furthermore it should be observed, in passing, that the correctness of
 
 58 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 §6iuy explanation of T3>IASAI/1A fi"'! )3IT^3S^ would not necessarily be 
 allected by any arguments which Prof. Conway might be able to bring 
 with the object only of supporting the possibility or acceptability of his 
 own theory. 
 
 §7 The main question {as from Prof. E. S. Conway's remarks in 
 C.R. vol. via. J}- 348 it would appear to he) : — 
 
 The so2md of the Laconian-Crrec/c $ (as contrasted with that of 
 the other Greek dialects); and the representation of Greek 6 on 
 Italic soil. 
 
 Let us pass on now to Prof. Conway's main objection to my 
 explanation of T3>1ASAHA. Put shortly, his contention would 
 appear to be, that Greek 6 could not have been represented in 
 Oscan by S, and that therefore my view cannot be correct, 
 
 I may at the outset say that Prof. Conway has hardly 
 represented my view in a fair light. We have not "to ask 
 simply, ' What was the sound of S in Oscan ? ' " The ques- 
 tion to be asked is, of course, '•' What was the soiind of 6 in 
 Laconian?" 
 
 That Laconian 6 was a sound differing widely from the 6 
 of the other Greek dialects, that foreigners (e.g. the Athenians, 
 cf. Aristophanes, Thucydides, etc., cited supra, pp. 12-13) 
 could only represent it adequately in writing by s, that at a 
 later period the Laconians themselves actually represented it 
 by s,2 is a conclusion to which we are brought by the united 
 
 ^ A glance at the inscriptions cited above in § 5 (pp. 49-53) will convince 
 Prof. Conway that he can no longer refuse to accept anasalet and Sesties as, at 
 any rate, perfectly hfjitimate translitei'ations of these forms. 
 
 - Cf. e.g. Cauer, Delect. Inscrr. Graec.^ (1883), No. 33 (of the first century 
 B.C. according to Foucart, quoted by Cauer, I.e.), several instances from 
 which [as well as avfo-nKe (— avid-nKi) from another Laconian inscription] were 
 cited in C.R. viii. p. 200 (= supra, p. 12).
 
 SECOND PAPER 59 
 
 evidence of Grammarians, Inscriptions, and MSS. [see C.R. viii. § '^ 
 p. 200 (= supra, pp. 11 ad fin., sqq.), and cf. also Ahrens, Be 
 Dialccto Dorica, § 7, pp. 6G sqq., Mullensiefen, De Tit. Lacon. 
 Dial, 1882, {5 8, G. Meyer, Gricch. Gramm?-, 1886, § 60, p. 70 
 ad init., § 211, p. 214, and F. Blass, Pron. of Anc. Grcek^ § 29, 
 p. (Eng. ed. 1890) 111]. 
 
 Whatever may have been the exact sound of Laconian 6, the 
 fact remains unansioerahlc that it ivas a sotmd which both could 
 he and actually loas represented among non-Laconians, and at a 
 later period even among the Laconians themselves, hy s.^ 
 
 ^ As said above in the text, our main point is not in the least affected, 
 whatever view we may take as to the exact sound of Laconian 6 ; but it will 
 not be out of place to add here a note upon this question. 
 
 In C.R. viii. p. 200 (— supra, p. 13, text and n. 1), two alternative views were 
 suggested as to the pronunciation of Laconian d : — (a) p. 13, n. 1 : that it was 
 pronounced ]> ( — Mod. Engl, th in thigh, doth), in which case the representation 
 by s was an attempt to represent this spirant value ; (0) p. 13 text : that it 
 was actually pronounced s (or some sound very closely approaching s). It may 
 be that we should unite these two suggestions thus : — 6 in Laconian passed 
 through the stage ]), on its way to « or to a sound which so closely approached 
 s that (as already proved, see pp. 12 and 58-59) it came to be represented even 
 on Laconian inscriptions by s. 
 
 Analogous to this representation of by s is the representation of S in Elean 
 (in which dialect S had a spirantic value) by (, e.g. ^4, ('iKaia, C^ku, &c. (in 
 Cauer, Delect. Inscrr. Graec.'^, No. 253). See Blass, oj). cit., § 29, p. 113. 
 
 Change from ]> to s is (as Mr. Welford has in a recent letter reminded me) 
 well illustrated by the Spanish Republics of South America : — (i) z, which in 
 Castilian Spanish is pronounced, as it were with a lisp, p (see J. W. Ralfs, 
 Rapid Road to Spcoiish, 1888, p. xvi ; C. M. Sauer, Spanit^h Conversation- 
 Grammar, 1888, p. 6 ; M. Velasquez and T. Simonne, A New Method of 
 learning the Sjjanish Language, 1890, p. 402), has in the Spanish Republics of 
 South America developed therefrom the pronunciation of Mod. Engl, ss (see 
 Ralfs, 0]}. cit., p. XV, Sauer, oj*. cit., p. 3) — (ii) Similarly we find that c, which, 
 when followed by e or i, is in Castilian Spanish pronounced ]> (see the various 
 writers already mentioned), has in the Spanish Republics of South America 
 developed therefrom the pronunciation of Mod. Engl, ss (see Ralfs, o^j. cit., p. 
 XV, and Sauer, op. cit., p. 3). 
 
 Nor does our own language fail to supply us with an occasional illustration 
 of change from ]> to s. Compare, for example, sink (for think) on the lips of 
 a Scotchman in Howe, o]j. cit. pp. 156, 192.
 
 60 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 7 [That we do not find this change of ^ to s in the writing of 
 the older Laconian inscriptions is only what we should have 
 expected, for the Laconians would long keep the letter without 
 themselves observing that its soitnd was gradually changing 
 (compare the somewhat similar history of ' rhotacism ' in Latin ^). 
 Foreigners {i.e. non-Laconians) would notice the change in 
 
 ^ This may be given shortly as follows : — 
 
 S between vowels had in Latin a natural tendency to become voiced : z 
 (of. Osc. egmazum 'rerum.') About 450 B.C. (or perhaps a little later) this 
 s, through this intermediate stage z, was commencing its passage into r. 
 Herein "an important piece of chronology can be established" by the fact 
 that the Celtic words for « gold ' (namely, Irish 6r, Cymr. aivr, Cambr. our, 
 eur, etc.), borrowed from Lat. aurum at "the time of the great Celtic move- 
 ments southwards which introduced the black day of AUia (390 B.C.) into the 
 Roman calendar," prove that early Lat. *amm7i (: Sab. aimum) ' gold ' had by 
 this time given way in pronunciation to aurum (see O. Schrader, Prehistoric 
 Antiquities of the Aryan Peojjles,^ Engl. ed. 1890, Part iii. ch. iv. pp. 176 sq.). 
 But, notwithstanding this change of Latin intervocalic s to r in pronunciation, 
 the Romans loiuj rontinned to lurite s, until at last the change was so patent 
 even to themselves that s between vowels gave way in ivriting (as well as in 
 pronunciation) to r (cf. Brugmann, Grmidr., vol. i. § 569). Cicero Ad Fam. ix. 
 21, 2, tells us that L. Papirius Crassus, consul 336 B.C., was the first of his 
 family to write Papirius instead of Pajnsius, the older form of the name. 
 
 Another good parallel is afforded by the Spanish Republics of South 
 America : — 
 
 As has been pointed out in the preceding note, z, which in Castilian 
 Spanish is pronounced ]>, has in the Spanish Republics of South America 
 developed the pronunciation of Mod. Eng. ss (the correct pronunciation 
 also of Spanish ,s, see Sauer, ojj. cif. p. 5 ; Ralfs, op. cit. , p. xvi. ). But 
 still, be it noted, notwithstanding the pronunciation of z in these States in 
 the same way as s, the spelling z is usually retained, as will be seen from the 
 following passages of the poets (with which Mr. Welford has kindly furnished 
 me) exemplifying rhyme between syllables containing s and z : — 
 
 Jesus Maria Gistiaga (of Venezuela), El Cuento de un Gato y un Baton: 
 
 ' Mas me duele en exeso 
 La nuca y el pescuezo.' 
 
 Esteban Echeverria (of the Argentine Republic), La Noche en el Mar : 
 
 ' Y arrojando de mi los viles lazos 
 De las torpes pasiones, 
 Encamino mis pasos 
 A mtinos vacilantes ambiciones.'
 
 SECOND PAPER 61 
 
 sound more easily than would the Laconians themselves.^ § 7 
 Hence it would be rather matter for surprise than otherwise 
 if we were to find 6 actually rcjjresented by s on the earlier 
 Laconian inscriptions.] 
 
 My contention therefore is, that : — Inasmuch as 6 was pro- 
 nounced in the Laconian dialect in a manner so like s that 
 Aristophanes, Thucydides, &c.,^ actually represented it by the 
 Athenian s, it is an obvious conclusion that in the proximity of 
 the Laconian dialect of Greek, as represented in South Italy 
 by the important Laconian colonies Tarentum and Heraclea, 
 the neighbouring Oscans must similarly have represented this 
 Laconian 6 hy s^. (See C.ii. viii. p. 200^). 
 
 Pedro Lacasa (of Peril), A mi Hija Hilaria : 
 
 ' Si algo pudiera tu afligido padre. 
 Si algo valiera tu plegaria a Dios, 
 Que en el regazo poses de tu madre 
 Solo pidiera mi doliente vo~.' 
 
 1 Cf. Roberts, Introduction to Greek Epigrajjhy, Part i. 1887, p. 362, "The 
 spirant in the Laconian Ql6s was written o- [(ri6s) by foreigners, especially 
 Athenians." 
 
 Similarly Blass, oj). cit. , § 29, p. Ill, writes that the ' ' Laconians had a 6, 
 which they themselves wrote certainly for a long period with the old symbol, 
 but which the other Greeks at an early time represented with a, as in the 
 well known vol rilo crtai." 
 
 - See C.B. viii. p. 200 (= pp. 12 sq., supra). Cf. also supra, p. 58. 
 
 3 It is well worth while here, dealing as we are with the word avedriKe as 
 pronounced by Laconians, to recall especially the fact [which I mentioned in 
 C.B. viii. p. 200 (= p. 12, supra), but which Prof. Conway has passed by 
 without notice], that on an archaising Laconian inscription of the second 
 century a.d., quoted by Miillensiefen, De Titidorum Laconicorum Dialecto 
 (1882), § 2, part iv. No. 59, p. 31, and § 8, p. 57, Cauer, Delect. Inscrr. Graec."^ 
 No. 34, p. 16, we actually find the word written avfcrriKe ( = aveOriKe) ' dedi- 
 cated.' With this we may compare the forms ^o-rj/ce taraKe (= i6r)Ke), cited in 
 C.B. viii. p. 200 (= p. 12, suprra, see also p. 14, 37, supra) from manuscripts 
 of Alcman. 
 
 (T for 6 in this particular verb occurs again in the form a-erw ( = fleVoi) cited 
 in C.B. viii. p. 200 (= p. 12, supra) from Aristophanes Lysistrata 1081, a 
 line put into the mouth of a Laconian. 
 
 * = p. 13, supra.
 
 62 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 §7 Prof. Conway objects that "We know from innumerable 
 examples how the regular Greek aspirates were represented 
 in Italic, namely by the corresponding tenues . . ., and there 
 is no evidence whatever that $ could be also used to represent 
 them." He quotes "Piliims (from (^iXfjnro'i) and Osc. S a n t i a 
 (from B.avOia'i) ^ as cases in point. 
 
 It is undoubtedly true that the early records of the 
 Latin of Latium as represented by Praeneste fSSO-lSO B.C.) 
 are in accordance with Prof Conway's remark, for example, 
 Pilipiis <^ <I>tX-t7r7ro9, "Pilonicos <[ ^L\6vet,K0<i, Melci^anta 
 <C, BeXX.epo(f>6vTr]<;, Taseos <C @d(Tco<; (E. Schneider, Dial. Ital. 
 Exx. Select., vol. i. 1886, part i., Nos. 50, 48, 56, 48). But later 
 on, in the Latin of the Tituli Mummiani (146 B.C.), we find 
 \Go\rinth.o (Schneider, oi^). cit. 290) beside Corinto (Schn. oj?. cit. 
 285), and in the Latin of the ' Tituli Magistrorum Campaniae 
 Pagorum ' (Schn. oj9. cit. Nos. 297-304) we find j3, t, ijh, th 
 side by side even on the same inscription of 114 B.C. (Schn. 
 op. cit. No. 302) : Bio'pantics and teat^v beside "Philemus 
 "Philinus Uiophcimo and Agathoclcs. Reverting now to Oscan : 
 beside the above-mentioned Santia, an inscription which 
 (dated rather uncertainly 425-338 B.C. according to Dr. von 
 Planta, Granim. d. Osk.-Umhr. Dial. vol. i. § 9, p. 30) has been 
 assigned to Nola (see Zvetaieff, I.I.I.D. No. 228, note), we find 
 thesaurum thesaurei (from Gk. Orjaavpo^) on the Cippus 
 Abellanus (Zvetaieff, 02). cit. No. 136, 11. 48, 52), which (ascribed 
 by Mommsen and Corssen to the beginning of the second century 
 B.C., by Blicheler to the beginning of the first century B.C. ; cf. 
 von Planta, op. cit. § 9, p. 32) belongs to Abclla, and contains a 
 treaty between the people of Abella and the people of Nola, 
 Nola and Abella, both situated in Campania, are only about six 
 
 ^ Mentioned supra, p. 11.
 
 SECOND PAPER 63 
 
 miles apart ; ^ and we thus see the Greek 6 represented in the § 7 
 Oscan just as in the Latin inscriptions of Campania by th as 
 well as by t — in the case of the latter on the same inscription, 
 in the former on two inscriptions within a radius of six miles. 
 Be the explanation what it may — [the probable explanation 
 being that the aspiration of consonants had by the second 
 century B.C. ceased to be regarded as strange, and that the 
 representation of the aspirates by the tenues, usual at an early 
 period, no longer seemed sufficiently accurate] — the fact remains 
 unanswerable that Greek d in Campania was represented not 
 only, as Prof. Conway would lead us to imagine, by t, but 
 also by th — {t first, th later) — each of which was an endeavour 
 to represent exactly the sound of the 6 as pronounced by the 
 Gampanian Greeks ; and I therefore fail to see what objection 
 •can be brought against my suggestion that in the proximity of 
 the Laconian dialect of Greek '^, as represented by the important 
 Laconian colonies Tarentum and Heraklea, the Laconian 6 
 (the "sigmatic" nature of whose sound has been discussed 
 above ^) should have been represented by s on an Oscan 
 inscription of that part of South Italy, where the Laconian 
 influence was greatest.^ 
 
 Prof. Conway's remark, "Can there be found in the 1200 
 pages ^ of Saalfeld's Thcsaums Italograccus a single example of 
 an Italic word with s derived from a Greek word with 6 ? no 
 
 1 See map facing p. 44. 
 
 2 The avaffaK^T inscription, it will be remembered, belongs to the close 
 neighbour, the 'Bruttiorum Ager,' rid. Zvetaieff, I.I.I. D. 1886, pp. 74-76, 
 and Prof. Conway in G.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 223. (See above, 
 p. 3, text and n. 4). ^ Supra, pp. 11 adjin.-13, and 58-61. 
 
 ■* In support of my view as given above in the text, the following remark 
 of E. W. Fay, in the A.J. P., vol. xvi. 1895, p. 494, may well be quoted : " The 
 question (sc. of the phonetic character of the Greek aspirates) may have been 
 a dialectic one with the Greeks, and the Italians had more than one dialect to 
 borrow from." The italics are mine. ^ Or, rather, 'Half-^a.gQS.'
 
 64 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 § 7 mention of such a change is to be found in his Laiitgesetze der 
 GrHcchiscken Lehmvorter," might to a casual reader seem well- 
 nigh overwhelming ! But, when we come to examine the works 
 in question, we find the full titles to be ' Tensaurus Itcdo- 
 graecus ; Ausfuhrliches Historisch-Kritisches Worterhuch der 
 Ghricchischen Lclin- nnd Fremdtodrtcr im Lateinischen ' and 
 ' Lautgcsctze der Griechischen Lehnworter im Lateinischen.' 
 It is at once seen that these two books, on whose evidence 
 Prof. Conway lays so much stress, deal only with Latin, whereas 
 we are dealing with Oscan, and with that special branch of 
 Oscan which came most in contact with the Laconian dialect, 
 with which Latin could hardly have had much to do. Prof. 
 Conway, indeed, in his excellent article ' On the Change of d to 
 I in Italic'^ (J^^h- borsch, vol. ii. pp. 157 sqq.) has himself given 
 us the most conclusive answer to his own argument. On 
 p. 158 of that article he allows "150 miles from the borders of 
 Latium (in the dialectic, not the political sense) " as the extreme 
 limit of distance on Italic soil, across which ordinary common 
 words could be carried to Latium. Now Heraclea is 205, 
 Tarentum 225 miles south of the most southern boundary of 
 Latium thus defined. Can we then be surprised that we 
 should find in Latin no trace of this "Osc. s : Laconian 0" 1 And 
 can we be astonished that no instances of this s : are to be 
 found in Saalfeld's list of Latin words borrowed from Greek ? 
 Much rather indeed would it be matter for wonder if Latin 
 were to shew any traces of this s : 6. Prof. Conway's remark, 
 it will thus be seen, has, on his own shewing, no influence at all 
 against my theory. 
 
 ^ Hereon see also the above-mentioned Essay on The Establishment and 
 Extension of the Law of Thimieysen and Havet, Part i. § 3, in the A.J. P., 
 vol. xvi. Dec. 1895, p. 450 note.
 
 SECOND PAPER 65 
 
 Conchision. 
 
 I have now answered, I think, every argument which Prof. 
 Conway has brought against my view — viz. that the Bruttian- 
 Oscan inscrijitional T3>1ASAI/1A is correctly transliterated avaaa- 
 Ker, and this wwd avacraKer represents the common Greek v'ord 
 aveOrjKe ' (he) dedicated,' as horro^ved hy the Bruttian-Oscans 
 from the Baconian Greeks of South Italy — and I venture to 
 hope that " the hypothesis of bon'owing " will no longer appear 
 to him " to hang upon a string of desperate improbabilities " 
 (Prof Conway in C.R. viii. p. 848). 
 
 In conclusion I would only add that Prof Conway has not 
 attempted to answer the very strong argument which I brought 
 against his own theory in C.B. viii. p. 199^ (see also pp. 53-50, 
 supra), and, further, that his theory is open also to many other 
 very serious objections, which have been set forth in detail in 
 the foregoing pages.^ 
 
 1 = supra, pp. 8 ad Jin., and 9. 
 
 - See § 4, pp. 41-49, and § 6, pp. 53 sqq.
 
 ADDENDA
 
 ADDENDA 
 
 TO 
 
 THE SECOND PAPER. 
 
 § 4, 2^. 41. 
 
 It would be interesting to know what Prof. Conway really regards as the 
 origin of his supposed symbol ^ " specially used to denote the Oscan/" in 
 Greek writing (see Prof. Conway's words quoted supra, p. 42). 
 
 In C.P.S. T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 222, he calls it " a new sign" whereby 
 " the Ionic a/3 (as used in South Italy)" has been " enriched," adding that it is 
 really "a reversed three-stroke sigma." See above, § 4, p. 42. 
 
 In C.i?. vol. viii. 1894, p. 348, he calls it — most enigmatically and quite 
 inconsistently—" a discarded form of the symbol of a similar sound" (i.e. of a 
 sound similar to f). See above, § 4, p. 45, n. 1. 
 
 It can hardlj' be both "a reversed three-stroke siyjua" and also "a dis- 
 carded form of the symbol of a sound similar to /" ! 
 
 Which (if either) of these two alternatives does Prof. Conway intend to 
 stand by ? 
 
 § 4, Map. 
 
 In the Map facing page 44 there is a slight inaccuracy, which, though 
 scarcely noticeable, may as well be rectified : — 
 
 The star marking the position of "{Monte Ollibano) Alliha" should have 
 been printed slightly further to the west, its correct position being almost 
 midway between Cumae and Neapolis. 
 
 § 4, 2^2^- 41-45. 
 
 "Reasons for doubt concerning the alleged use of the symbol ^ to represent 
 Oscan f in Greek writing." 
 
 In § 4, pp. 41-45, with reference to the initial letter of ^EN|EP,I pointed 
 out that there is no e.vidence ivhatever for the use of a sup2)osed f symbol^ 
 — [whether the latter were to be regarded as " a reversed three-stroke sigma" 
 (Prof. Conway in C.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892), or as a "discarded form of
 
 70 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 the sj-mbol of a sound similar to /" (according to Prof. Conway in C.B. viii. 
 1894), a point on which Prof. Conway would appear not to have made up his 
 mind, see mipra, pp. 42, 45 n. 1, and Addenda, p. 69] — to represent Oscan f 
 ill Greek ivritiwj. 
 
 On the other hand — as is rightly remarked by Prof. Fay in The American 
 Journal of PhiloJo(jy, vol. xvi. part 4, Dec. 1895, p. 494 — " It is certain that 
 the Oscans represented their f by <p in the coin-legend ' <45| ^TEAI A )( Pi st- 
 luis' (Zvetaieff, I.I.T.D., p. 78)," (cf. supra, pp. 42 sqq.); and this, too, 
 on the shewing of Prof. Conway himsetf (following Imhoof-Blumer), ''before 
 the earliest possible date of any Fensemum coin" {supra, pp. 44, n. 1, and 43).-' 
 
 cf), moreover, occurs again in a coin-legend of ' Alifa' cited by L. Sambon, 
 Recherches sur les Mommies de la PresqiC lie Italique, 1870, Plate xi. 33, and 
 P. R. Garrucci, Le Monete delVItalia Antica, 1885, part ii. p. 91, namely 
 AUI-O-HA (standing for AU14>HA, see Sambon, op. rit. p. 162, J. Fried- 
 lander, Osh. Miinz., 1850, p. 26, and Garrucci, op. rit. p. 91, col. 2). 
 
 With regard to the fifth letter TH] of this latter coin-legend, scholars are 
 apparently not agreed. Friedliinder, I.e., holds that it " kann f ilr tj oder fiir 
 h stehen, so dass Alifea oder Aliflia zu lesen ist," while Garrucci, I.e., p. 91, 
 col. 2, thinks that the two letters 4? and H "sono adoperate per un semplice 
 c}) " ( = " are used for a simple 4) "). However this may be, the main point for 
 us to observe is that here again we have (not Prof. Conway's supposed 
 y-symbol ^, but) <i?. 
 
 Curiously enough, Imhoof-Blumer, in the Nnmism. Zeitsrhr. vol. xviii. 
 p. 208, quotes tliis latter coin-legend (directly from Sambon, I.e.) without 
 observing that its very existence beside Alifa (Sambon, op. cit., PI. xi. 34) 
 — to say nothing of 4^ I ^ TEA I A beside F i s t e 1, F i s 1 1 u i s, etc. (which 
 he appears to have entirely forgotten) — militates directly against his own 
 explanation of the ^ of ^ENIEP as a sign / ("oder r," see p. 42, n. 4, 
 supra) for which, as he was himself forced to admit [I.e. p. 217), " freilich 
 noch kein anderes Beispiel bekannt," and which, as already shewn (pp. 42-45 
 supra), was quite unnecessary. 
 
 The so-called ' Ali/an ' ' Ali^Aan ' ' Alli/an ' ' Alli?mn ' coins are, it is ad- 
 mitted, not free from difficulty. Scholars are agreed neither as to the exact 
 name or names nor as to the exact geographical position of the town or 
 towns to which they belong : — 
 
 (1) Friedlander, op. cit., 1850, p. 26, T. Mommsen, Die Unterital. Dial., 
 1850, p. 106, and Sambon, op. cit., 1870, p. 162, appear to agree in referring 
 all the said coins to one and the same town, a town not far from Cumae, bear- 
 ing the name of ' Alifa ' ' Alipha' ' Allifa(e)' or ' Alliba,' and situated probably 
 on the slopes of what is now known as the ' Monte Ollibano ' ^ (which thus 
 would seem to preserve the ancient name). 
 
 ^ No note is here taken of iaMaKoi ' Falisci ' incorrectly cited as Oscan (by 
 Fay, I.e.). 
 
 - The ' Monte Ollibano ' lies midway between Cumae and Neapolis, being 
 distant about five miles from each [see the map facing p. 44 srqn-a (as rectified 
 by the correction given above, p. 69, s.v. "§ 4 Majj")].
 
 ADDENDA TO THE SECOND PAPER 71 
 
 (2) H. Dressel, on the other hand (in Curtius, Hiator. unci Philol. Aitfudtze, 
 1884, p. 251), assigns them all to the Samnitic ' Al(l)ifa(e).' 
 
 But (3) the best solution of the difficulty is that oflered by Garrucci, o^a cit., 
 pp. 91 and 95 sq. This scholar considers that these various coins should be 
 divided into two distinct categories, and holds that the coins shewing Al{l)if- 
 (including therewith the above-mentioned AUcf'HA) belong to the Samnitic 
 ' Al(l}i/a(e),' and that tliose shewing Al/ib- belong to a totally distinct town, 
 a Campanian ' Alliba ' (very probably the aforesaid ' Monte OUibano ' of the 
 present day i). 
 
 If Garrucci's view is (as would seem probable) correct, the difficulty concern- 
 ing the ' Alli6an ' coins vanishes at once (all such coins being referable to the 
 said Campanian ' Alli6a') ; and the only point remaining for comment is the pre- 
 sence of the Oscan letter 8 in the Greek writing of thefonn AAA I 8ANi~IN 
 [cited (but quei-y whether cited correctly-) by T. Mommsen, Die Unter- 
 italischen Diahkte, 1850, p. 105] alongside the above-mentioned Alifa and 
 AH 4^ HA. Such a form, however, presents no real difficulty. It only shows 
 that, so far from considering it necessary to invent (beside c(>) any such sup- 
 posed new /-symbol ^ to represent their Oscan/ in Greek writing, the Oscans 
 of Allifae at times actually made use of their own native Oscan /-symbol 8 
 for the purpose. 
 
 Assuming for the moment that Garrucci's view is incorrect, and that the 
 correct view is either (1) or (2) — namely that all these coins are to be re- 
 ferred to one and the same town — in such case we should indeed frankly have 
 to admit that the coins of this said town show a considerable variety of 
 legend. But, even so, the fact would notwithstanding remain unanswerable 
 that never once do loe find an instance of the supposed f -symbol ^ to represent 
 in Greek ivritiny the f of AUifae, any more than the f of the above-mentioned 
 Fistelia. 
 
 In conclusion, therefore, it cannot but be observed that, had the legend which 
 we are more particularly discussing — (namely ^E N ^ E P)— really been intended 
 to represent Fenser(nu) in Greek writing, it is on every ground above- 
 mentioned most unlikelj' that for the purpose of transliterating the / it 
 should have been deemed necessary to invent any such new symbol ^. 
 
 For the "Arguments to shew that, even assuming the existence of such use of 
 a symbol ^ at Fensemtim, the Q of the Oscan ivords avaQaK^r and Q^cttus 
 cannot be this supposed symbol ^," see pp. 45 sqq. sujjra. 
 
 1 Cf., in support of this view, Murray's Handbook for South Italy and 
 Naples'^, 1868, p. 324 : "The Monte OUibano recalls the lost town of Alliba, 
 of which coins have been discovered in the neighbourhood." Compare also 
 Friedlander's statement, Lc. (p. 25, and Plate v. 4), that coins showing 
 AAAIBANON (a form on which see Sambon, o]^. cit., PI. xi. 32, and p. 
 162, text and n. 2) have been discovered "haiifig" in the neighbourhood of the 
 neighbouring Neapolis. 
 
 ^ It is worthy of note that this form is not mentioned in Friedlander, Osk. 
 Milnz., 1850, pp. 25 sq., nor in Sambon, Becherches, 1870, p. 162, nor in Dressel, 
 op. cit., 1884, nor in Garrucci, o^j. cit., 1885, part ii. , pp. 91 and 95 sq.
 
 72 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 % i ad Jin. , p. 49. 
 
 It seems harillj- necessary to give serious consideration to the suggestion of 
 R. Thurneysen (on p. 38 of the ' Anzeiger ' of the Idij. Forsch. vol. iv. 1894) — 
 a suggestion which, be it remarked, differs materially from and therefore 
 cannot be considered as affording support to either of the tivo (for they are 
 distinctly fwo) advanced quite unconcernedly (as if they were one and the 
 same) by Prof. Conway (see above, pp. 42 and 45, n. 1, and Addenda, p. 69). 
 
 Thurneysen's theory — put forward only as a " Moglichkeit " — is that the S 
 in T3>IASAHA;in(l J3|T^3S"iay be a "simplified" ( " vereinfachtes " !) form 
 of the Oscan y'-synibol 8 ! In other words, tliat in order to represent their 
 f in Greek writing the Oscans mutilated and used a fragmentary portion of 
 their own tlius mutilated symbol 8- -An effective method of " simplification," 
 truly ! but hardly more. For, had the words under discussion been in- 
 tended to represent *anafaket and *Fe-stie.s, and had the engraver wished to 
 represent this / in Greek ivriting by the use of the native Oscan ^-symbol 8 
 [instead of by 4) as in CJJl^TEAIA (cf. also AH4'HA)seeabove, pp. 42,s5'(j'. 
 and Addenda, pp. 70 .sv/.], he would beyond question have used not a mere 
 mutilated form, a mere fraction, f of the whole, but — (as appears may 
 actually have been sometimes the case at AUifae, see p. 71, supra) — the 
 symbol 8 in its entirety. 
 
 It may be mentioned, further, that in any case Thurneysen's suggestion 
 is open to all the objections raised against Prof. Conway's view in § 6 
 (pp. 53 sqq., supra). 
 
 § 5, p. 51. 
 With C.I.I. 49 (cited in § 5, p. 51, 1. 2) compare G.I.G. 7380 b. 
 
 § 5, p. 52. 
 
 It will not escape observation that the two material letters in OAY^EV^ 
 namely | and ^ (neither of which can be anything but a sigma), are identical 
 both in form and in direction with the ^ and ^ of the Oscan-legend ^ENIEP 
 (discussed in § 4, pp. 41, sqq.). 
 
 This fact at once disposes of the two arguments whereb}' Imhoof-Blumer 
 sought to prove that the ^ of ^ENIEP " wird nicht als Sigma aufzufassen 
 sein" (Numism. Zeitschr., vol. xviii., 1886, pp. 216-217, cited supra, p. 49). 
 
 § 6, p. 55, II. 1-3. 
 
 After the words " In Oscan, so far as our records go, we never find the verb, 
 
 even when uncompounded, used with any such meaning as 'offer, sacrifice, 
 
 dedicate'": Add " unless indeed fakiiad — in the phrase sakrim fakiiad 
 
 kasit medikk. tiivtik Kapv. 'let some one make up (or place, set 
 
 aside) a sacrificial portion for the purposes of the Capuan meddix tuticus ' ^ 
 
 could be considered as a case in point." 
 
 1 See my paper on 'The Italic verb eehiia- ehia-,' in the Class. Rev., vol. x., 
 1896, pp. 195-196.
 
 ADDENDA TO THE SECOND PAPER 73 
 
 § 6 ad fin. 
 
 In § 4, pp. 41 sqq., I ventured, with reference to the coin-legend ^EN^EP, 
 to point out " Reasons for doubt concerning the alleged tise of the symbol 
 ^ to rtprtHtnt Oscan f in Greek ivriting" ; and, on pp. 45 sqq., I gave 
 '^Arguments to show that, even assuming the existence of such use of a symbol 
 ^, the S of (^^ Oscan words T3)iASAl/IA and )3IT^3S cannot be this 
 supjiosed symbol ^." 
 
 In § 6, pp. 53 sqq., I raised "Objections to Prof. Conioay''s postulated 
 *anafaket," and, on pp. 56 sq., gave reasons for "Doubt concerning Prof. 
 Conwafs postulated *Festies," considered each on its own merits (apart from 
 any consideration of the question — discussed in § 4 — whether the symbol 3 
 could by any possibility represent/). 
 
 I find the soundness of my argument boi-ne out by Dr. von Planta in his 
 Oramm. der Osk.-Umbr. Dial., vol. ii. 1897. 
 
 On p. 604 of this recent work von Planta is willing to admit (what I for the 
 sake of argument was willing to assimie, see p. 45) that the ^ of ^ENIEP 
 " zweifellos =/ist" — [it may be remarked in passing, however, that on p. 648 
 he slightly modifies the certainty of his "zweifellos "] — and he then proceeds 
 •(just as I have done) to show that it by no means necessarily follows thence 
 that the words ^3IT^3S and T3)IASA1/IA can be regarded as representing 
 *Festies and *anafakei ; for, as he briefly observes on p. 604 : — 
 
 " Sestius Sextius ist ein in Unteritalien wie anderswo sehr gewohnlicher 
 Name, wahrend Festius in C.I.L. ix. und x. gar nicht vorkommt ; und . . . fiir 
 anafalcet die Bedeutung ' er hat geweiht ' ohne direkten Anhalt ist, da/acere 
 Umbr. feitu doch nur vom eigentlichen Opfern gebraucht wird." (See further 
 § 6, pp. 53 sqq., siqjra.) 
 
 P. 64. 
 
 " The Bridtian-Oscan inscriptional T3)IASAI/IA is correctly transliterated 
 avaaaKfT, and this ivord avaaaner represents the common Greek word aveOriKe ' he 
 dedicated ' as borroived by the Bruttian-Oscans from the Laconian Greeks of 
 South Italy'''' (concerning whose sigmatic pronunciation of Q see pp. 11 ad fin.-\Z, 
 and pp. 58 sqq. ) 
 
 It is on the authority of Zvetaiefi" I.I.I.D. 1886, pp. 74-76, and Prof. Conway 
 himself in G.P.S.T. vol. iii. part iv. 1892, p. 223, that I have throughout the 
 present work treated the T3>IASAHA (as well as the ^3IT^3S) inscription 
 as belonging to the ' Bruttiorum Ager. ' 
 
 From Zvetaieff, S.I.O. 1878, Pars Prior, pp. 82-84, and I.I.I.D. 1886, 
 p. viii. , however, and from R. von Planta, Gramm. der Osk.-Umbr. Dial., vol. 
 ii. 1897, p. 498, notes, it appears possible that the home of our two inscriptions 
 was not the ' Bruttiorum Ager ' after all, but Lucania. 
 
 Seeing that the Laconian colony Heraclea is itself actually in Lucania, this 
 latter view could only serve still further to strengthen my case ; while, at the 
 same time, if Biicheler is right in regarding ^ as in use among the Osci of
 
 74 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 Lucania [as it was among the Osci of Fistelia, see pp. 42 sqq. supra, of. also the 
 case of Al(l)ifa(e), mjira, pp. 70 sqq.] to transliterate their Oscan / in Greek 
 writing (v. siqtra, p. 48, n. 1), it would add yet another very strong ai-gument 
 against Prof. Conway's attempted explanation of the S of ^3IT^3S and 
 
 f3)iASAHA,
 
 INDEX
 
 INDEX OF WOEDS 
 
 [Note. — For a summary of the main questions discussed in the ' Second Paper ' 
 reference should be made to the ' Brief Outline ' on p. 19 supra, and to 
 the 'Abstract' on pp. 21-23 supra. 1 
 
 ^.—PHRYGIAN. 
 
 aSa/f6T, 15 a55a«:€T, 15 
 
 'AX/fio-otSas (Lacon.), 12 
 
 &\\oKa (Doric), 14 
 
 &v (Boeot., Arcad.), 10 
 
 avd (Attic), 10 
 
 aueevK€, 10, 11, 15, 25, 
 
 30, 61, 65 
 avi(TT]Ke (Lacon.), 12, 58, 
 
 61 
 
 (O-aKe (Lacon.), 12, 14, 
 
 37, 61 
 ^trrj/ce (Lacon.), 12, 61 
 
 ^OXOlD^,42,52 
 
 ^.— GREEK. 
 
 ^rj<TTos, ' Festus,' 48 
 fj-drrip (Doric), 14 
 
 OAYIEV^42,52,72 
 
 Trarap (Elean), 14 
 TraTT/p, 14 
 
 ^s'CeiJ', 9 
 
 ffe7os (Lacon. ), 12 
 aerw (Lacon.), 61 
 
 Srjpa/'SpiSa (Lacon.), 12 
 :2,-l}pLTnros (Lacon.), 12 
 Si/cAtjs (Lacon.), 12 
 ffiv (Lacon.), 12 . 
 (ri6s (Lacon.), 61 
 fftocpSpos (Lacon.), 61 • 
 2i7rO;U7ros (Lacon.), 12 
 aid!) (Lacon.), 12, 61 
 aiu (Lacon.), 12 
 (Tu^aros (Lacon. ), 12 
 
 C4 (Elean), 59 
 (eKa (Elean), 59 
 CiKaia (Elean), 59 
 
 Agafhodes, 62 
 andthematlzO, 27 
 anhelo, 10 
 antlo, 27 
 atticisso, 28 
 aurum, 60 
 
 bddisso, hddizo, 28 
 baeto, 28 
 
 C— ITALIC. 
 
 LATIN. 
 
 haptlzo, 27 
 barba, 25 
 blasphemo, 27 
 
 campso, 28 
 cdnSnlzo, 27 
 cdtechizo, 27 
 chdlo, 28 
 christidnizo, 27 
 
 comisso, 28 
 comsacraverunt, 40 
 consacratae S7mt, 40 
 consacratissimo, 40 
 consacrdvi, 39 
 consacravit, 39, 40 
 consecro, etc., 39 
 [Coyintho, 62 
 Corinto, 62
 
 78 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 crdtulisso, 28 
 crutulifitria, 28 
 cydthisxo, 28 
 
 dedico, 9 
 depso, 28 
 dico, 9 
 
 Dio]jantus, 62 
 rfo, 9 
 
 Evphcmio, 62 
 
 facere, 8, 9, 54 sg., 73 
 /actus, 54 
 
 /'esiww, 8, 23, 57, 73 
 Festus, 5, 8, 48, 56, 57 
 fimdo, 28 
 
 rjargdrisso, (jargdrlzo, 28 
 gilberno, 28 
 
 LATIN — coiUimied. 
 
 iiiaccresco, 56 
 infectus, 9, 54 
 i-dddizo, 27 
 
 ^opiY, 31 
 
 mdldcisso, 28 
 Melerpanta, 62 
 
 obsOnO, 28 
 ^i/eo, 28 
 o//ac?ci, 28 
 
 Papirius, 60 
 Pajnsius, 60 
 pdrulrdi/oedo, 28 
 pdtrisso, 28 
 Philemuti, 62 
 PhiJinus, 62 
 Pilijnis, 62 
 Pilonicus, 62 
 
 2}r8pino, 28 
 iD.sa//o, 28 
 pyfisw, 28 
 jjorto, 9 
 
 sahhatizo, 27 
 
 aace.r, 15 
 
 sacro2)ha'/us (Vulg. 
 
 Lat.), 15, 38, 39 
 sarccqAagus, 15, 37 
 scanddlizo, 27 
 scdri/o, scdrlpho, 28 
 5'es<Mw, 6, 8. 23, 56, 73 
 -S'e.s'C;;*', 6, 8, 56 
 -Sear^jifs, 6, 8, 23, 56, 73 
 <S'ea;<?is, 6, 8, 56 
 strangfdo, 28 
 
 Taseos, 62 
 
 wveo, 9 
 
 OSCAN. 
 
 [a/cET ?], 4 
 J/^'/a, 70, 71 
 
 AUct^HA, 70, 71,72 
 Alliba in Campania, 71 
 
 AAAIBANON, 7i 
 
 Al(l)ifa(e) in Samnium, 
 71 
 
 AAAI8ANnN,7i 
 
 [ava o«fT ?], 4 
 [*o»'a/a/i:6T ?], 4 sg., 8 .s*?., 
 
 19, 21, 22, 26, 45-49, 
 
 53-r,8. 72, 73 
 T3>IASAMA, (facsimile) 
 
 4 
 avaffaKer, pamini 
 augetuzet, 10 
 
 halteis, 28 
 
 dadllcatted, 9 
 
 deded, 9 
 
 5e5fT, 5, 7, 8 (facsimiles), 
 
 9, 34 
 desi rfit, 6 
 t/ « it nated, 9 
 
 e.ehiia-, 72 
 egmazum, 60 
 Evklui, 11 
 
 fa k Had, 72 
 fffani-^f, 5 
 
 f^ENlEP?], 41 
 
 [*/'eKser?], 5, 8, 22, 41 
 sv/g., 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 
 fensernu, 5, 42, 43 
 
 [>3T)3S ?], 5 
 
 [*/'e.4'^t.s ?], 5, 8, 56 
 
 [>3IT^3S?], 8 (fac- 
 
 simile) 
 [*/'e..y».s?], 8, 19,22,23, 
 
 45-49, 53, 56-58, 72, 
 
 73 
 fi s t e /, 42 
 
 <}5UTEAIA,42,70,72 
 
 fistluis, 42, 70 
 fiatltis, 42 
 
 Herukinai, 11 
 hijdd, 28 
 
 i !i Iniks, 11 
 AaTToris, 11 
 MafiepeKifs, 3, 4 
 iroTfpffi, 11 
 
 ^, 5, 8 (facsimile) 
 
 ^aiirtj/y, 3, 4 (and fac- 
 simile) 
 
 sakahiter, 10, 15, 
 22,37 
 
 aaKopo, 15, 22, 37 
 
 ■sakrim, 15, 22, 37, 72 
 
 Santia, 11, 62 
 
 r^EN^EP],4i,45 
 
 [^EN^EP], 5, 8, 22, 
 41 .S77., 69, 70, 71, 72 
 
 [>3T^3S]> 5 
 
 [Ststes-], 5 .sg., 7, 8, 56 
 
 )3IT^3S, (facsimile), 8 
 Setitie.-i, 6, 8, 19, 22, 23, 
 
 45-49, 56-58, 73 
 ^TreSij, 3, 4 (and fac- 
 simile) 
 
 the.sauru m, 62 
 / /i « s- a ?< r e i), 62 
 TpeyS/s, 5, 6, 8 (facsimile) 
 
 ilitti uf, , 48 
 
 Fa\f(p, 48
 
 INDEX OF WORDS 
 
 79 
 
 SABINE. 
 rxusnm, 60 
 
 UxMBRIAN. 
 
 a a life h t af, 5, 9, 22, fa h u s t, 5, 55 
 
 54 feitu, 55 
 
 anient u, 10 feitu, 73 
 
 feta, 54 
 destrame, 6 fetii, 55 
 
 /e<M, 55 
 ehia-, 72 
 
 habetu, 28 
 Aa^?6s-<, 28 
 
 klavlaf, 5, 54 
 
 sestentasiaru, 6 
 
 Z).— ROMANCE LANGUAGES. 
 
 ITALIAN. 
 ^Zi/e, 43 
 consacrare, 40 
 
 FRENCH. 
 
 consacrer, 40 
 cons^crateur, 40 
 consecration, 40 
 
 sacrer, 40 
 
 i of a-<-i7 ? and the like, 
 34 89-. 
 
 consecrazione, 40 
 
 Ollihano (Monte), 71, 70 
 
 sagrare, 40 
 iSa?!. Oracte, 39 
 santoreggia, 39 
 
 SPANISH. 
 
 consagrar, 40 
 consagracion, 40 
 
 sagrar, 40 
 
 PROVENgAL. 
 
 consecrar, 40 
 consegrar, 40 
 consecracion, 40 
 
 sagrar, 40 
 
 ^.—GERMANIC. 
 
 ANGLO-SAXON. 
 predician, 29 
 
 MID. -ENGL. 
 
 apelen, ajypehn, 27 
 
 accroach, to, 27 
 acroche, to, 27j 
 amortise, to, 27 
 Anathemation Creed, 39 
 anientise, to, 27 
 appeal, to, 27 
 
 MOD.-ENGL. (including SCOTCH). 
 
 assumpsit, 33 
 
 arace, to, 27 
 arrest, to, 27 
 assart, to, 27 
 assume, to, 33 
 assumed (3 S. aor. in-) 
 die), 33 
 
 brandish, to, 29 
 6ra;:e, to, 29 
 
 crtsY, to, 29 
 
 cai-'e ('beware'), 33
 
 80 
 
 THE OSCAN WORD ANASAKET 
 
 MOD. -ENGL, (including SCOTCH)— continued. 
 
 cf., 33 
 cH]}, to, 29 
 consecrated (Scotch), 38 
 
 danh, to, 29 
 dele, ' erase,' 32 
 demvr, to, 27 
 deraii/7i, to, ) q- 
 dereyn, to, / " 
 deviae, 27 
 die, to, 29 
 r/jV/Zi/, to, 29 
 dook, to, (Scotch), 30 
 
 equip, to, 29 
 escape, to, 29 
 esloyne, to, 29 
 
 /o-sA, to, (Scotch), 30 
 fleech, to, (Scotch), 30 
 /MiY/, to, 29 
 jlor., floruit, 33 
 frown, to, 29 
 /iter, 27 
 
 gardy (Scotch), 32 
 gasji, to, 29 
 • gaze, to, 29 
 grate, to, 29 
 grudge, to, 29 
 
 /ia/e, to, 29 
 /ia?j, to, 27 
 hatd, to, 29 
 
 ignoramus, 32 
 ignore, to, 32 
 
 jalorise, to, (Scotch), 29 
 jeofail e, 32 
 
 yi7;, to, (said of a horse), 
 29 
 
 ^i7^ .9/. ^n?!, 39 
 
 N.B., 33 
 
 non-jilacets, 35 
 non-placeted, 35 
 
 o/>. , o?>ii7, 33 
 q^e?-, to, 29 
 oA yes, 32 
 oyeti, 32 
 yes, .32 
 oyes, 32 
 
 placets, 35 
 placeted, 35 
 preach, to, 29 
 prender, 27 
 proochy, (Scotch), 32 
 
 quoire, 33, 34 
 quere, 33 
 query, 33 
 
 recoupe, to, 27 
 render, to, 29 
 ri».se, to, 29 
 rwe, to, 29 
 
 (S'am^ ^4?m',s Church, 39 
 
 Sainffoiu, 38 
 
 5^ /'o^?^, 38 
 
 5'i;. Puh'hre, 39 
 
 5'«OTf.s' &e//, 38 
 
 ^9^ 6T>es, 39 
 
 semhle 'it seems' (3 S.), 
 
 31 
 semhle, to, 31 
 sewiWes (3 S.), 31 
 shrive, to, 29 
 «nA-, to, 'think' (Scotch) 
 
 59 
 spend, to, 29 
 s<e<, 32 
 s<o/), to, 29 
 strive, to, 29 
 
 <fflie, to, 29 
 to^^•, to, 29 
 terminer, 27 
 thrive, to, 29 
 traverse, to, 29 
 trover, 27 
 
 valete ' farewell,' 34 
 vamos, vamose, (Amer.), 
 
 36 
 wVZ., vi(Ze, 33 
 t'l's^c?, 35 
 ■yme, OTzy, vizzy (Scotch) 
 
 30 
 
 loaive, to, 29 
 
 annoncieren, 36 
 
 MOD. -GERMAN. 
 corrigieren, 36 
 
 dressieren, 36 
 
 marschieren, 36 
 
 i^.— KELTIC. 
 
 CAMBR. 
 e?fr, 60 
 oitr, 60 
 CYMR. 
 otw, 60 
 
 GAELIC. 
 
 aor, 27 
 
 &ajs<, 27 
 
 coisrig, 27 
 creirf, 27 
 
 (Jr, 60
 
 INDEX OF WORDS 81 
 
 6^.— COPTIC. 
 ( EGYPTIAN CHRISTIAN'.) 
 
 A list of Greek verbs borrowed by, 28. 
 enSOCOH {«>' Scro;'), 46 
 e(j)OCOH (i'p'ocrou), 46 
 80C0H {■6croi'),il 
 
 G
 
 nr THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 Ars Tragica Sophoclea Cum Shaksperiana Comparata; an Essay 
 on the Tragic Art of Sophocles and Shakspere, to which was 
 awarded the Members' Prize for Latin Essay in the University 
 of Cambridge, 1894. Macmillan and Bowes, Cambridge, 1896. 
 6/- net. 
 
 Opinions of the Press. 
 
 " Mr. Horton-Smith's Essay . . . is a highly creditable piece of learning and 
 Latinity, which follows, always with propriety, the academic models for such 
 performances ... It compares Shakspere and Sophocles with a minute 
 care, taking due care of the differences of the times in which the two poets 
 wi'ote, and of the different theatrical conditions they had to contend with . . . 
 The Latin is dignified and forcible." 
 
 The Scotsman, 5 Nov. 1896. 
 
 " The Essay is evidently based upon a very wide and very thorough 
 acquaintance with the best literature that has gathered round both Sophocles 
 and Shakspere. Like some of Milton's works, the composition for its sub- 
 stance is wortli translating into English ; and ... it may, as a piece of Latin 
 composition, be M'ell regarded as worthy of a place among the best specimens 
 of modern Latin writing." 
 
 The Glasgoio Herald, 18 Nov. 1896. 
 
 "In connexion with this book" (namely, Professor Lewis Campbell's 
 ' Sophocles in English Verse ') " we may mention the very elaborate composi- 
 tion which gained the Latin Essaj^ prize in the University of Cambridge in 
 1894 . . . We fear that the people who Mdllingly read a Latin essay are not 
 so numerous now as they were in the days of Erasmus, but those who make 
 the attempt will find Mr. Horton-Smith's both ingenious and learned." 
 
 The Times, 28 Nov. 1896. 
 
 "A sulistantial volume ... in Ciceronian Latin." "Mr. Horton-Smith has 
 collected his materials with infinite industry." 
 
 The Daily Chronicle, 1 Dec. 1896. 
 
 " A glance at the list of authorities quoted, the synopsis of the essaj', and 
 the abundant notes under the text, will shew with what extreme care and 
 fulness the subject has been handled. In plan, arrangement, and execution 
 the work is admirable. When we turn to the Latin text, we hnd the thought 
 perspicuous, and full of just sense, the style extremely clear, with lively inter- 
 change of exact statement, argiunent, and apostroplie, in the true Ciceronian 
 manner. The book is equally valuable to the student of literature and the 
 lover of Latin prose." 
 
 The Marlburian, 16 Dec. 1896,
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS 
 
 " We welcome the work. Mr. Horlon-Sinith writes according to appi'oved 
 idiom ; }'et witli apparent ease. At times, indeed, lie seems to be thiniiing in 
 Latin, so entirely wanting is anj' effort at expression. And tiiis, we take it, 
 is one of the surest signs of .scliolarship. Dut it is nut liere onl}' tliat Mr. 
 Horton-Sniith is entitled to praise. He has a clear perception of the essential 
 difi'erenco between ancient and modern drama ; and in his attempt to dul}' 
 weigli the merits of eitlier poet so as to attriljute to each his own appropriate 
 praise, we think he has succeeded well." 
 
 The New Af/e, 14 Jan. 1897. 
 
 " This is the essay to which was awarded the Members' Latin Essay Prize 
 at Cambridge in 1S94, and is decidedly more interesting as a contribution to the 
 literature of criticism tiian most productions of its kind. Indeed, it is almost 
 a pity tliat the obscurity of a dead language veils it from the avei'age pjnglish 
 reader. The contrast between the conditions under which Sophocles and 
 Sliakspere were acted is carefully drawn out . . . The essay is well provided 
 witii synopsis and index, and fortified as well with references." 
 
 The Academy, 23 Jan. 1897. 
 
 «' We commend it for a good general view of the subject." 
 
 The Guardian, 17 Feb. 1897. 
 
 " Mr. Horton-Smith's essay, which has been printed 'by request' and pub- 
 lished in a handsome form, deserves a wider audience than is commonly 
 accorded to a Prize Exercise. 
 
 In clear and intelligible Latin he has put forth a series of observations 
 whicli he has collected and arranged in a lucid order, while adding to them 
 valuable reflections of his own . . . 
 
 Tiie relation of ancient to modern tragedy is a fruitful subject which is by 
 no means exhausted. Arising under conditions vastlj' different, in regions 
 and in ages far apart, they are found to acknowledge common principles and 
 to share a common spirit. 
 
 There is at first sight some incongruity between the Latin text and notes, 
 and the P]nglish headings, marginal summary and synopsis. Yet on second 
 thoughts it appears that the author has used good judgment here. If he is to 
 have more than a scholastic audiencu, as it is to be hoped he will, this incon- 
 sistency may contril)ute not a little to his success. 
 
 Tlie Latin dress which he wears as a primary condition of his task is in 
 itself an advantage. For it gives the opportunity of — 
 
 "propria communia dicere." 
 
 Ro much has been written both on Sophocles and Shakspere, that many of 
 Mr. Horton-Smith's observations if expressed in English might have appeared 
 common-place. But tiiose who peruse his essay will find in it much that is 
 striking and suggestive ; and it will be unfair to him if his ample citation of 
 autiiorities should be allowed to derogate from iiis originality . . . 
 
 Perhaps tlie topics on which Mr. Horton-Smith will be found most inter- 
 esting are (1) pp. 83 ^'7*7., the ancient chorus, with its effects, and its equiva- 
 lents in the modern drama, (2) pp. 64 sqq., the contrasts of character, and (8) 
 pp. 78 sqq., the use of 'tragic irony' . . . 
 
 This writer has broken ground effectively in a fruitful subject ; and in 
 treating of a theme which is very apt to lend itself to fantastic subtleties or to 
 the pedantries of ' science falsely so called ', he has not overstepped the 
 bounds of connnon-sense." 
 
 Professor Lewis Campbell in The C/assical Remeir, March, 1897.
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS 
 
 " Wie das Titelblatt sagt, wurde diesei' Arbeit vor zwei .Tahren von der 
 
 Universitiit Cambridge der I'reis fiir den besten in lateiniscber Sprache verfas- 
 Rten Essay ziierkannt. Jet/t liegt sie luer, grossartig ausgestaltet, gedruckt 
 vor, mit einer Fiille von Belegen. 
 
 Vorausgeschickt ist eine Liste der benutztcn englischen, franzosischen uud 
 deutschen Werke . . . 
 
 Der Verf. hat seine Aufgabe sehr geschickt angefaast und den reichen Rtoff 
 sehr iibersichtlich geordnet. Beide Uichter stehen ilun gleicli hoeh. Er zeigt, 
 wie beider Kunst sich von eigenartigen Anfitngen aus unter dem Einttusse 
 ilirer Zeit gerade so entwiokeln musste . . . Der Verf. streift dabei alle 
 Streitfragen der Kritik und Asthetik iind vergleicht die beiden Dichter hin- 
 sielitlieh der Form wie des Inhaltes, hinsichtlich der Okonomie wie der 
 \\'irkungen ilirer iStiicke. AUes bietet sich in einer angenehmen und durchaus 
 klaren Form (hi . . . Der Verf. trifft alle seine Entscheidungen mit klarem 
 und gesundem Urtheil und verliert sich nie in die unendliche Breite seines 
 Gegenstandes . . . Sehr ansprechend ist der Abschnitt (pp. 37 sq(].}, wo er 
 von dem etwa dem Chore der Griechen in der Tragodie Shaksperes Entsprech- 
 enden I'edet. 
 
 Das Buch ist in lateiniscber Sprache verfasst und ist als lateinischer Es-say 
 gekront worden. jNIan kann der Darstellung Klarheit, leichten Fluss, Farbe 
 und Wiirme nachriihmen . . . Immerhin hat seine Sprache etwas Frisches 
 und Lebendiges und steht hoch iiber dem, was sich filr gewohnlich in Pro- 
 grammen und Universitatsschriften heute in lateinischer Sprache darbietet." 
 Wochenschrift fiir Klnssische Philolofile (Berlin), 24 March, 1897. 
 
 "^Mr. Horton-Smith's essay obtained the Members' Latin Essay Prize at 
 Cambridge three j-ears ago. It is seldom that these compositions emerge from 
 obscurity ; and at least equally rare that they shoiild be of the elaborate 
 character that distinguishes the volume before us. It is a fine and careful bit 
 of criticism, expressed in excellent Latin." 
 
 The Spectator, 24 July, 1897, p. 121 (see also 31 July, 1897, ad fin.). 
 
 " Mr. Horton-Smith's Latin Prize Essay is in its present form a sealed book 
 to the majority of readers, and it is to be hoped that an English translation 
 of it will soon enable ordinaiy readers to avail themselves of its valuable 
 contents. 
 
 It certainly appears singular at first sight to find so much in Shak- 
 spere, the chief of dramatists of the romantic school, that reminds one 
 of Sophocles, the chief of that classical drama which presents so manj' 
 distinct points of difference. The truth, however, is that the longer and 
 the more thoroughly one studies ancient classical poetry the more one marvels 
 at its spirit of modernness ; and the more the greatest productions of Shak- 
 spere's dramatic genius are studied the more one recognises its affinity to the 
 essential qualities of Greek dramatic genius . . . 
 
 Although jSlr. Horton-Smith deals with the main differences between the 
 Greek and the English dramatic poet, and points out the causes to which these 
 divergences are chiefly due, as well as the difterences of their metrical struc- 
 tures and their available materials, j-et the most striking feature of this 
 treatise will be found in the author's summary and discussion of the points 
 of resemblance between the tragic art of Sophocles and that of Shakspere. 
 
 The chief points of resemblance are briefly the following : — The skill with 
 which Sophocles and Shakspere conceal themselves in their work (p. 60), 
 their foils to set oft' chief characters by contrast (pp. 64 sqq.), their harmony of 
 diction with the action of tragedy (p. 73), their placing on names and verbal 
 puns (pp. 74 sqq.), their 'tragic irony' (pp. 78 sqq.), their use of external 
 nature to suit and harmonise with the action of the drama (pp. 83 sqq.), the
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS 
 
 common ami essential liuinanity of tlieir cliaracters (pp. KJG .sq.), tlieir uni- 
 vei'saiily, as sliown l)y tlie importance tliey attacli to tlie great sentiments of 
 maiikinil, sucli as frieliilsiiip, love between parents and cliildicii, brothers and 
 sisters, luisband and wife (p. 107)." 
 
 The Morniny Post, 81 July, 1S97. 
 
 (1) The Italic Verb EEHIIA- EHIA-: In The Classical Review, Vol. 
 
 X., May, 18iJU. 
 
 'The Origin of the Gerund and Gerundive: In Tho American 
 Journal of Philology, Vol. XV, Part 2, .July, 1894. 
 
 Further Notes on the Origin of the Gerund and Gerundive : 
 
 (2) - In The American Journal of Plulology, Vol. XVI., Part 2, 
 .Tilly, 1895. 
 
 Concluding Notes on the Origin of the Gerund and Gerundive : 
 
 To appear sliortly. 
 
 (3) Latin BARBA and its initial B : In The Classical Review, Vol. 
 
 X., Dec. 1890. 
 
 (4) The Establishment and Extension of the Law of Thurneysen 
 
 and Havet : In The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 
 X\'I., Part 4, Dec. 1895, and Vol. XVII., Part 2, July, 1896. 
 
 (5) The Origin of Latin HAVD and Greek OY ;— And the Extensions 
 
 of the originally unextended Form : In The American Journal 
 of Ph'ih,lo(jy, Vol. XVIII. Part 1, April, 1897. 
 
 (6) Some Sanskrit Greek and Latin Derivatives of the Indo- 
 
 Germanic Root EU-, * to fail, to be deficient, to be 
 wanting' : In '■ Bezzenheryer's Beitruye' r.ur Kuiide ilcr Jiido- 
 Uerinanlaclion S^prachcn, Vol. XXII., 1896. 
 
 (7) KT2202 and HEDERA: In The American Journal of Philology, 
 
 V.l. XVL, Part 1, April, 1895. 
 
 (8) The word am<i>ii^yo2, occurring in Sophocles Traeh. 504: In 
 
 "The Classical Review, \'ol. V., Oct. 1891. 
 
 (9) Note on the words GOMATIR ISHAH, occurring in the 
 
 Rigveda I. 48 (Hymn to the Dawn), 15 : hi The Journal 
 of Phi/uluyy (Loudon : ]\lacniillan & (Jo.), Vol. XXV., No. 49, 
 1897.
 
 1 54
 
 University of California Library 
 Los Angeles 
 
 Tliis hook is DUE on the last date stamped helow. 
 
 01 APR 17 |,, 
 
 umvi 
 
 ^ A T ^^''Opi^TJ^ 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 LIBRARY
 
 p]^ Hgrtgnri^mith_^ 
 "il^T^Tvro papers on 
 H78t th^_Pscan.v(ord 
 
 "^i^sake't. 
 
 L 007 118 642 3 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 535 975 
 
 PA 
 
 2457 
 H78t