The meaning of the name omega is O great; and this much of this letter the learned have known, because they knew that the word mega means in Greek great. But of the o itself, when radically considered, they have known just as much as they have of all the other letters; and I need not tell the intelligent and impartial reader the extent of this knowledge, for he knows as well as I do, that it solely consists in being able to say that A differs from B in both sound and form, and that the one letter stands first, and the other second in the alphabet.

But though the learned can pride themselves on their knowing that mega means great, they cannot tell what the word mega in itself means, or what first gave men this idea. It is to be thus analysed, im-oig-oi, of which the meaning is, "the high one;" that is, the Almighty. It can, of course, be still analysed several other ways, but the meaning will be ever the same. I have given this analysis of mega, in order to show that it is the same as the Latin word magnus, which is, when we take away the article us, magn; that is, im-oig-in ("the high one"), for the in at the end of this analysis is equal to io or oi. But I ought to have explained oig. The reader can easily conceive that if this word were written oit, it would clearly indicate height, as the T is for the head or top of any thing, so that o-it or it-o is visibly the head or high one. But we have already often seen that the same idea is also signified by ig or iv, because these words are

synonymous with head, from their meaning "the first life;" that is, "the head life," the "being," or "thing," which is "first above." We have also seen how the word it is formed from iii or iv, thus, iï; and as G in Greek, when made thus, y, is composed of the three parts that compose iv, we are to consider it as being precisely equal to the word IT; so that oig and oit have exactly the same meaning. As to the in μeya being equal to o, it has been too often shown to need, in the present instance, any farther remark. But mega might be also analysed thus, iv-ig-oi; and these three words are equal to I, I, I, of which the meaning also is, "the high one." For here we may consider the first I as an article to the second, which we are to consider as an adjective, meaning "first," or "high," and so qualifying the third I, which is in this case to be rendered by one, so that the I thrice repeated means, "the first one," or "the high one." The English word great is, when analysed, ig-ir-iv-oit, "the first double being," "the life above." Here the e is equal to E, and consequently to wor iv. The French or Latin word grand (for when we omit the article in grand-us, it is as much Latin as it is French) is to be analysed thus, ig-ir-oin-id, "the high being," "the one above." If grand be analysed thus, ig-ir-and, we shall have the English conjunction and, and thus see confirmed the analysis already given of this word, of which the meaning was shown to be, as the reader may remember,

"one above," which is the same as one joined or added. Hence we see that the Latin and French conjunction et has, when analysed thus, o-it ("one above"), exactly the same meaning; and that this analysis of et is very correct, there can be no doubt. But is not et equal to these two Greek letters ? It is. And as these are equal to vt, of which the analysis is iv-it, "the first life above," we have still the same meaning to be found in and. We may also remark, that as iv-it is the same as in-it, and that in is here for one, we have, literally, in iv it what we have in oin-id, the analysis of and. But may not this in become also io? It may; and this clearly proves that io means iv, "the first life," and that between this word and one there is no difference in meaning; and as io is equal to 10, we see that ten is only another form of one; and that as it may be analysed thus, it-on, it literally means, "the head one," that is, the first one of all. I have made no remark with regard to the T being employed in et and the D in and, because it has been often observed that these two letters are used indifferently; but we can now tell the reason why: both letters mean the Divinity or the Head, and hence in the form of both, height is plainly indicated. This reminds me of an observation which I forgot to make when accounting for delta. This character is, when a capital letter, made thus, A; but I am pretty sure that it must have also stood thus, v, in which we have I above the V (V); it having first been beside it, thus, IV. Now, as A is, like the T,

a name for the Divinity, why should the top part be turned down? There is a wise reason for it: some men believed the Divinity to be under ground, instead of being over head; and in order to signify this, the head of A has been turned down (♥). Hence Dio is, when analysed, the same as Dis, as has been already shown; and the latter was a name given to Pluto, the god of hell. Thus the sign which indicates the head in both T and ▲ must, in the beginning, have been placed above; and hence, as these letters have had the same origin and the same meaning, we can account for their being so frequently used indifferently.

I have done with the twenty-four letters of the Greek alphabet; and in the account given of them are to be found explained the letters of all the languages on earth. In a great and important discovery, we are not to look to the quantity of new matter brought to light, but to the system by which it has been found, for in this alone lies the real discovery. As all the letters of the Greek alphabet, and, consequently, of every other, have grown out of one, and as their powers are infinite, I cannot believe but that all things, no matter how vast, various, complicated, and endless they may now appear, must have begun in the same way. This belief establishes a principle which, if we closely adhere to it, as I have endeavoured to do in this work, may lead us, unknown to ourselves, to won

drous things to important discoveries and improvements in all the arts and sciences of which man has hitherto known any thing-for it must be the basis of all human knowledge.

I have remarked, in the account given of alpha, that this word means also, all in a, from which I inferred that all the other letters of the Greek alphabet are to be found in alpha. The analysis which gives this meaning is that which gives all of a (alif-a); for if means also in, as I have shown in the explanation given of the conjunction if. When we bear in mind that the letter a is composed of these two parts, o and i, that is, of a circle and a straight line; and that these two parts make three, from the O being divided in two equal parts, thus, CO, each of which is equal to the other part of a (i), or to a straight line, it can be easily perceived, from what has been shown, how all the other letters of the alphabet are composed of these three signs, O, I, C, placed in various ways. Hence whenever it is said in this work, as it frequently is, that certain letters are equal to certain other letters, we are not by this to understand that they are not equal to all others, but that they serve more generally as substitutes for the letters thus referred to than they do for others. But a itself can be reduced; for as it is an o and an i put together, and as each of these two letters stands in apposition to the other, and that the one is consequently precisely equal to the other, it follows that they are but one and the same sign, since precise equality cannot