1 A peculiarity of Eastern manners is the scrupulousness, with which the Easterns in some parts abstain from mentioning the name of their sovereign, even when they are not addressing him personally. The following passage is quoted by Mr. Burder in his Oriental Customs (Vol. 11. p. 392. 3d ed.) from the Asiatic Researches: "Among the Hindus it never has been customary to call any prince by his proper name: this custom has been communicated to the Burmas with such strength, that it is almost impossible to learn the name of any prince during his reign: his titles only can lawfully be mentioned; and the law is enforced with such rigour that Burmas, even in Calcutta, shudder when requested to mention the dreadful name: nor am I satisfied (says the writer of this article) that either Capt. Symes, or I, could ever procure the real name of the reigning monarch." That a similar scrupulousness prevails among the Chinese is, perhaps, obvious from this curious circumstance that, whenever the Chinese had any occasion to mention the name of their sovereign to any of the gentlemen of the British embassy, as we see in several 'Mr. Burder quotes this passage as an apt illustration of Rev. c. XIX. v. 12." He had a name written, that no man knew but he himself, " but he is here mistaken; for the Eastern knows the name of his sovereign, but he will not pronounce it from scrupulous motives. anecdotes related by Mr. Barrow, and Sir. G. Staunton, one of the imperial titles is used instead of his name. Mr. Collins, in his account of a funereal ceremony among the natives of N. S. Wales, says (Vol. 1. p. 605.): "They enjoined us on no account to mention the name of the deceased, a custom they rigidly attended to themselves, whenever any one died; and in pursuance of this custom, Nan-bar-ray, one of whose names was Ba-loo-der-ry, had actually relinquished that, and obtained another name:" Again he says in p. 607. "Cole-be's wife, who bore the same names as the deceased, lost them both on this occasion, and was called by every one Bo-rahng-al-le-on: this peculiarity was also observed by them with respect to a little girl of ours, of whom Ba-rahng-a-roo was so fond, as to call her always by her own name: on her decease, she too was styled Bo-rahng-al-le-on." If the Easterns so scrupulously abstain from pronouncing the name of their sovereigns, need we wonder, at the scrupulousness of the Jews in pronouncing the name of God, who was the King of their state? Thus we are told by Mr. Burder in his Oriental Customs (Vol. 11. p. 381.), on James IV. 15. If the Lord will, that it was " a custom among the Jews to begin all things with God: they undertook nothing without this holy and devout parenthesis, If God will: they otherwise expressed it, If the name please, or If the name determine so:” many periphrastic expressions for God in the Old Testament may be explained upon this principle. Lamy observes in his Apparatus Biblicus, Vol. 11. p. 86. "This respect, which they had for the name of God, or the custom of not pronouncing it, but in the temple, was a thing very ancient among them: Josephus, and other ancient authors speak of it, and we have marks of it in the Greek version of the LXX. neither the name of Jehovah, nor any other that comes near it, is once to be found in the whole version; but in all the places of scripture, where this word is, there is put in the room of it a Greek word, which signifies Lord, and answers to the name Adonai, which signifies the same thing." We are told that the authority of Pythagoras was so great among his pupils, that to dispute his word constituted a crime, and that his pupils deemed it a sufficient answer to reply to an opponent that the master said so the expression in Greek is avròs pa: I have remarked that the name of Pythagoras is never mentioned: may not this suppression of his name have proceeded from profound respect, as it is known to do in the East? One of Plutarch's Roman Questions (p. 140, Vol. III. oct. ed. Wyttenbach) is this: Διὰ τί τὸ Θεὸν ἐκεῖνον, ᾧ μάλιστα τὴν Ῥώμην σώζειν προσήκει καὶ φυλάττειν, εἴτε ἔστιν ἄῤῥην, εἴτε θήλεια, καὶ λέγειν ἀπείρηται, καὶ ζητεῖν, καὶ ὀνομάζειν· ταύτην δὲ τὴν ἀπόῤῥησιν ἐξάπτουσι δεισιδαιμονίας, ἱστοροῦντες Ουαλέριον Σωρανὸν ἀπολέσθαι κακῶς διὰ τὸ ἐξειπεῖν ; Toup has the following learned note in his Emendationes in Suidam, Vol. 11. p. 324. "Notandum et istud, οὐδεμιᾷ, μὰ τὸν, ἀπειροκαλίᾳ : sic Philo Vol. II. p. 271. ed. Mangey, εἰώθασι γὰρ ἀναφθεγξάσθαι τοσοῦτον μόνον νὴ τὸν, ἢ μὲ τὸν, μηδὲν παραλαβόντες, ἐμφάσει τῆς ἀποκοπῆς, τρανοῦν ὅρκον οὐ γενόμενον, ad h. 1. vide cl. Koen. in Gregor. de Dialectis, p. 65. qui addit Per Deam jurantes dicebant μὰ τὴν, et vi τὴν: vide Schneider Periculum Crit. p. 36. et Suid. ν. νὴ τὴν et v. Λαχάνοις : eadem locutio occurrit in Epigr. quod legitur Anthol. p. 300. et ap. Laert. in Lycon. : ita etiam loquitur Philodemus in Epigr. Miscell. Lips. p. 141. et Aristoph. Ran. v. 1421. μà τὸν, ubi Schol. ἐλλειπτικῶς ομνύει. καὶ οὕτως ἔθος ἐστι τοῖς ἀρχαίοις ἐνίοτε μὴ προστιθέναι τὸν Θεὸν, εὐλαβείας χάριν· εἰώθεισαν δὲ τοῖς τοιούτοις ὅρκοις χρῆσθαι, ἐπευφημιζόμενοι, ὥστε εἰπεῖν μὲν, μὰ τὸν, ὄνομα δὲ μηκέτι προσθεῖναι : hinc obiter intelligendus est insignis loc. Plutarchi in Cleomen. p. 319. ed. Barnes, Μέγας οὖν τῷ φρονήματι γεγονὼς ὁ Κλεομένης, ἐθρασύ νετο πρὸς τοὺς πολίτας, καὶ τῶν παλαιῶν τινὸς αὐτοὺς ἀνεμίμνησκε βασιλέων εἰπόντος· Οτι, μὰ τὴν, Λακεδαιμόνιοι πυνθάνονται περὶ τῶν πολεμίων οὐ πόσοι εἰσὶν, ἀλλὰ ποῦ εἰσὶν: hinc etiam intelligendus Damascius ap. Photium, p. 1038. ed. Schott. γυναῖκα παιδοποιὸν ἄγεται, ὡς δ ̓ οὐκ ἐπείθετο τὸ δαιμόνιον τῆς γυναικὸς ἐξελθεῖν λόγοις ἡμερωτέροις, ὅρκῳ αὐτὸ ἐπηνάγκαζεν ὁ Θεοσέβιος, καίτοι οὔτε μαγεύειν εἰδὼς, οὔτε θεουργίας μὰ τὴν μελετήσας : hodie nullo sensu legitur μάτην et in Damascio, et Plutarcho; quod viros eruditissimos admodum exercuit: nos utrique suam lectionem restituimus." NOTE ON THE PROMETHEUS. ν. 224. κράτιστα δή μοι τῶν παρεστώτων τότε ἑκόνθ ̓ ἑκόντι Ζηνὶ συμπαραστατεῖν. παρεστώτων· τῶν ἐνισταμένων πραγμάτων, Schol. Β. “ Earum rerum, quæ menti tunc succurrebant, vel quæ tunc facere licebat. Agam. 1055. τὰ λῷστα τῶν παρεστώτων λέγει,” Gloss. p. 195. The first of these two interpretations is the correct one, as is |