Then again the question arises whether, seeing that _en_ and _es_ in the Celtic tongues, and _el_ in the Germanic, have the force of diminution, this may not be the meaning in the names of rivers. Zeuss, (_Die Deutschen_), suggests this in the case of the Havel and the Moselle; but seeing that one of these rivers has a course of 180 and the other of 265 miles, I think they might rather be adduced to prove that these endings are not diminutive. We may cite also the Yssel and the Albula (Tiber), both large rivers, with this ending. While in Germany we have two rivers close together, the great and little Arl, (anc. Arla, or Arila)--here seems the very case for a diminutive, yet both rivers have the same ending. Not but that there are instances of a diminutive in river-names, but they seem of later formation. Thus there is no reason to doubt that the French Loiret, which is a small river falling into the large one, means "the little Loire." Etymology in this case is in perfect accord with the facts. Upon the whole, then, I am inclined to the opinion, which seems in the main that of Förstemann, that, at least as the general rule, these endings are simply phonetic, and that they have no meaning whatever. In our own and the cognate languages, _en_ is the principal phonetic particle--_e.g._, English bow, Germ. bog_en_--Germ. rabe, Eng. rav_en_--Lat. virgo, Fr. vierge, Eng. virg_in_. But we have also traces in English of a similar phonetic _er_, (_see Latham's Handbook of the Eng. Language, p. 199_). The general reader will understand better what is here intended by comparing our words maid and maid_en_. Between these two words there is not the slightest shade of difference as regards meaning--the ending _en_ is merely added for the sake of the sound, or, in other words, it is phonetic. Just the same difference then that there is between our words maid and maiden I take to be between the names of our rivers Lid and Lidden. The ending in both cases serves, if I may use the expression, to give a sort of finish to the word.