adjectives hy^der-ivastive syllables or so-called sttffi|f(p,yin
which these iangnagesjdeveliope the.^^ate^tfvrich.nfe^j in - the
formation- of .words;-« "The richest an- thisfr’espect are the Sanskrit,
the Greek, and the German^languages, and it is seldom
that the: termination agrees with -the similar ones of another
dialect, asJsome examples may show: from the root a <7*,and.
ak (mdere), the Sanskrit makes ak-sha (ocUlus), the Prussian
&ekw, thef&eek wkqc/-the.Latin oc-ulus; from dak the
Sanskrit makes! dakshana (dextra), the Greek. tiefia, the Old
P russian tickra.
. The Prussian displays .many of these* endings, whkdjj. resemble
most nearly the Lithuanian and Lettish, and sometimes
theGerman. It would occupy too much room to enumerate
them all, and to -compare them with similar suffixes the
Sanskrit. Lastly, th e - Prussian and Lithuanian language
has .in common with the cognates the power of forming
compounds, and gives indeed examples of true Indian.scom-
position; for example, when the first member ip^the absolute„
state must be considered in the relation-of» a case, as but-sargs
(paterfamilias); where, however, the ‘true,|gveniti-yel|a’pp'gav^,.
buttas^taws: -in-like manner from the particle: jra i^ tn s k rit
so), and lub (amare, Sanskrit lujbh, Zw6erg)r4he^lojnpound
saluban (matrimonium) is formedr and others, which iSpme.-
times appear to be formed after the German, as kaimalucke
(heim-mcheti). The construction has^already accommodated
itself to the genius of theGerman tongue, for the.'language
early lo st its determinate character; but how rich it eve then
was in sound, and how easily it accommodated ^ts.elf .icimetre,
the translation of the well-known verse will show: “ Ein" jeder
lern’ sein Lection,” &c., which is thus given by Abel W ill:
“ Erains mukinsusin swaian mukinsnan
T it wfsst labhai stalliuns enstan buitan.”
S e c t io n W .-^Conclusion.
The only conclusion that can be formed from a consideration
of the facts surveyed in the two preceding sections is,
that the Old Pruthenians or Prussians, the Lithuanians and
the Lettish p^^jlW'form a grdu pe of nations, distfbet from the
G'&ri’ffaft^%;r'“iGot,^0®®feewbn ©Sfe-side, and from the Slavi on
'tlfe'other, though'more nearly related tor.these nations, and
particularl^t®%hd .4&tter, than to other branches of the Indo-
European 'family. They appear to have been subject to an
order of p r i e s t s , » e r f p l than those.of the other nations
in the nMst^df fE'ffrbpe^ and only -Comparable to the Druidical
'i$librM?^hyi amon|j,{>th£ "Celts. Their language-sdiffered Coiir
srderably from- the othe^eas&t&itof European dialects, and pre-
‘ stervet thdfforms 0^ t h e 5§anskMW'im a much purer and less
al-ter^d-ifete.’ It mUMttfe considered I as a branch springing
more i m m e d i a t e l y t h e 1 original*-stofek. The inference is,
-that the* people of the narrow extent «of cbuntry included
|f e t# e e n the Finns and Goths' were-a distinct- tribe, who p ree
le d - th e ^ la v ic in them northern process, and it is
prdbabi#thaf'r% :5^ha.d ©©cuffed the' coast« the Eastern
Baltic-rMhy -afef 4'Aore^ the arriiyafiof that people in the
- northern^paTts of'« Sarmaffos Itcfe! not - improbable that they
Vfere the YeMdi or' Venedse of the classical* writers? from the
..^O of Pliny to that ©pPtolemy#^