Let us take Englishmen and Dutchmen first. In Danvers's _Letters_ (1611) we have both "_coho_ pots" and "_coffao_ pots"; Sir T. Roe (1615) and Terry (1616) have _cohu_; Sir T. Herbert (1638) has _coho_ and _copha_; Evelyn (1637), _coffee_; Fryer (1673) _coho_; Ovington (1690), _coffee_; and Valentijn (1726), _coffi_. And from the two examples given by Col. Prideaux, we see that Jourdain (1609) has _cohoo_, and Revett (1609) has _coffe_. To the above should be added the following by English writers, given in Foster's _English Factories in India_ (1618-21, 1622-23, 1624-29): cowha (1619), cowhe, couha (1621), coffa (1628). Let us now see what foreigners (chiefly French and Italian) write. The earliest European mention is by Rauwolf, who knew it in Aleppo in 1573. He has the form _chaube_. Prospero Alpini (1580) has _caova_; Paludanus (1598) _chaoua_; Pyrard de Laval (1610) _cahoa_; P. Della Valle (1615) _cahue_; Jac. Bontius (1631) _caveah_; and the _Journal d'Antoine Galland_ (1673) _cave_. That is, Englishmen use forms of a certain distinct type, _viz._, cohu, coho, coffao, coffe, copha, coffee, which differ from the more correct transliteration of foreigners. In 1610 the Portuguese Jew, Pedro Teixeira (in the Hakluyt Society's edition of his _Travels_) used the word _kavah_. The inferences from these transitional forms seem to be: 1. The word found its way into the languages of Europe both from the Turkish and from the Arabic. 2. The English forms (which have strong stress on the first syllable) have _o_ instead of _a_, and _f_ instead of _h_. 3. The foreign forms are unstressed and have no _h_. The original _v_ or _w_ (or labialized _u_) is retained or changed into _f_. It may be stated, accordingly, that the chief reason for the existence of two distinct types of spelling is the omission of _h_ in unstressed languages, and the conversion of _h_ into _f_ under strong stress in stressed languages. Such conversion often takes place in Turkish; for example, _silah dar_ in Persian (which is a highly stressed language) becomes _zilif dar_ in Turkish. In the languages of India, on the other hand, in spite of the fact that the aspirate is usually very clearly sounded, the word _qahvah_ is pronounced _kaiva_ by the less educated classes, owing to the syllables being equally stressed.