each three signs, besides the concession of one each for _hou_ and _ô_. A simple _u_ is not suffered to appear; but _ha_, _he_ or _e_?, _ya_, _aï_?, and _oui_ are classified among the vowels. Some difference still exists as to the treatment of the vowels. The latest authority limits them to _a_, _e_, _i_ and _u_, and excludes _o_.[643] M. Oppert ranks _a_ or _ha_ among the consonants; and in addition to _e_, _i_ and _u_ he admits _o_ and such sounds as _yi_, _ya_, _ah_ among vowels.[644] But it is in the treatment of the consonants that De Saulcy has most departed from the earliest and the latest scholars. He fully admits the syllabic character of the language, but he has done the utmost under the circumstances to conceal this peculiarity.[645] In his list the only sign that appears in syllabic form is the semi-vowel _ar_ attributed to a defective sign (No. 10), and the eye already accustomed to the appearance of syllabic combinations is struck by the singular bareness produced by purely alphabetical letters. He admits altogether twenty-one distinct consonantal sounds, of which fourteen are ‘quiescent’ or simple consonants, and each is represented by one sign only, except _m_, _w_, to which three are allotted. He allows six gutturals to a language that has at most but two, and fills the other classes with scarcely less profusion. He recognises that the signs for _m_ and _w_ are interchangeable, and that _d_ and _t_, as well as _b_ and _p_, have several signs common to both; but he gives both _p_ and _t_ the exclusive use of others; and _dè_ and _dh_ have each a sign reserved to themselves. His consonantal sounds are given different signs according as they are supposed to be followed by _a_, by _e_ or _i_, and by _o_ or _ou_, an idea no doubt suggested by the restricted use of the same principle in Old Persian. These letters may be said to be practically syllabic signs, as they are only used in conjunction with a vowel; but in reality the classification involves serious error. It is now admitted that, with few exceptions, the same sign never conveys the sound of more than one vowel, and in the isolated cases where it occurs it is generally at the end of a word. In the whole Syllabarium of Weisbach there is only one instance where the same sign is given an optional sound of _pe_, _pat_, and in that of Oppert there are only three where _a_ can be exchanged for _i_.[646] In neither authority is there a single instance where _e_ and _i_ are interchangeable. It is therefore a fundamental error of the gravest character to represent the same sign as systematically employed to express either of two vowel sounds, even if the two selected were ever interchangeable. It is, moreover, doubtful whether there was any difference allowed between the sounds of _o_ and _u_, except in the attempt to express foreign words. De Saulcy’s system also excluded the compound syllables when two consonants are divided by a vowel. While