The _true_ elements of intermixture with the Georgian family have been Greek, Persian, Armenian, Turk, and Russian; as may be collected from the history of the country. The amount of Lesgian, Irôn, Mizjeji, and Circassian blood is uncertain. The safest view to be taken of the history of Georgian civilization is to remember that, different as may be the languages of Georgia and Armenia, the political history and the local relations are alike, and have generally been so. The Christianity of Georgia was from Armenia; so was its literature; so also its alphabet--although in their present rounded form its letters are very unlike the square and angular characters of Armenia. THE LESGIANS. _Locality._--Eastern Caucasus, or Daghestan. _Name._--No native _general_ name. Called by the Circassians Hhannoatshe; by the Tshetshentsh, Suéli. _Dialects._--1. Avar, spoken by the tribe who call themselves Marulan,=mountaineers, from Marul=mountain. Falling into the Anzukh, Tshari, Andi, Kabutsh, Dido(?), Unso(?) sub-dialects. 2. Kasikumuk. 3. Akush--sub-dialect Kubitsh. 4. Kura of South Daghestan. THE MIZJEJI. _Locality._--West and north-west of the Lesgians. _Name._--Not native. _Divisions._--1. Galgai, Halha, or Ingúsh. 2. Kharabulakh or Arshte. 3. Tshetshentsh. 4. Tushi. THE IRÔN. _Locality._--Central Caucasus; conterminous with the Mizjeji on the East, the Georgians on the south, the Circassians on the north, and Imeretia on the west. _Name._--Called by themselves Irôn, by the Georgians, Osi (Plural Oseti). As the single skull of the Georgian female did all the mischief in the physiological ethnography of Caucasus, an Irôn vocabulary has been the prime source of error in the way of its philology. Klaproth considered that the number of words common to the Irôn[40] and Persian languages was sufficient to place the former amongst the Indo-European languages. More than this, there were historical grounds for believing that the Irôn was the ancient language of Media[41]--also of the Alani of the later Roman empire. No man believed all this more than the present writer until the appearance of Rosen's sketch of the Irôn (_Ossetic_) grammar. He now believes that the Irôn is more Chinese than Indo-European. Assuming, however, that Klaproth's position is correct, it follows that as the Georgian is undoubtedly akin to the Irôn, it may be Indo-European also. This is the view taken by Professor Bopp, from whose work, in favour of this position of the Georgian, the criticism relating to the numerals was taken. The method is as exceptionable as the result. If the Georgian be Indo-European, the Chinese is Indo-European also; and if the vaunted laws concerning the permutation and transition of letters lead to such philological leger-de-main as is to be found in more than one work of the German school, our scholarship is taking a retrograde direction.