Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 7.djvu/44

 36

NOTES AND QUERIES. [9 th s. vn. JAN. 12, 1901,

amongst Arabs, and have been in more than one simoom, but, so far from evolving myths, the first thought of Ali or Jafir is to vyrap up his head in his abba or ha'ik or kujfiyeb, or whatever may be the most convenient gar- ment at hand, and throw himself on the sand with his nostrils close to the ground, and thus escape as far as possible the blasting effect of the scorching blizzard. The name of simoom, or, as the Arabs vocalize it, samiim, is derived by them from a root signifying poison, and they look on it as a poisonous wind and nothing more.

As for Atlas, I have many times sailed through the Straits of Gibraltar, and can conceive it possible that some poetical Greek may have given the name of Atlas to the range from a fancied resemblance to the giant who in his mythology bore up the heavens on his shoulders. But I should doubt if the giant of the myth originated with the moun- tain, which probably received its Greek name long after the myth was established. I can- not really see much difference between CANON TAYLOR'S theory and those of the late Prof. Max Miiller and Sir George Cox. CANON TAYLOR asserts that Zeus is the sky, but will not suppose with Max Miiller that Athene is the dawn. One supposition seems just as likely, or unlikely, as the other. No one ever can give a conclusive explanation of the Greek myths. Those in which Semitic names, such as Cadmus or Adonis, occur, may be reasonably supposed to have been derived from Eastern sources ; the others were either of priraieval Aryan origin, or were inherited from the autochthons of Thessaly, Thrace, or the Peloponnesus, or finally were due to the inventiveness of the Greeks themselves.

W. F. PRIDEAUX.

It was supposed, some time since, that the theory of nature myths had been abandoned. But these speculations never die. Some people cannot believe in pure imagination. They think^that all fables are allegorical. But, il the Greek fables are to be so interpreted there is no difficulty in explaining othei things in the same way. Volney, in hit ' Ruins,' has explained all the known religions of the world, including the Christian religion as nature myths. I did not read carefullv what he has written, for I do not like the theory, nor do I believe in it in any form I noticed that he had explained them so E. YARDLEY.

Any student may become saturated b^ a study of works by the Rev. Sir G. W. Cox Hart., &c. ; his ' Manual of Mythology,' a smal educational volume, deals largely with such

urmises. As a small contribution, I would uggest that the pictured head of Medusa is ounded on a study of the octopus; we have he normal oval cuttlefish, with the eight uckers vibrating as if actually in water.

A. HALL.

GEORGE ABBOTT, M.P. FOE TAMWORTH, 1640-9 9 th S. vi. 490). His will, proved 1649 in the 3.P.C. (54 Fairfax), would possibly throw some ight on the queries asked. As he is stated ,o have been a native of Yorkshire, and as NQ know he was born in or about 1606 (he jied 2 February, 1648/9, in his forty-fourth pear), there can be little doubt that the entry it Gray's Inn, 10 May, 1624, of " George, son and heir of George Abbott, of the City of York, Esq.," refers to him. It certainly does not refer to his contemporary George Abbott, M.P. for Guild ford (with whom he is so often confused), who was son of Sir Maurice Abbott, Lord Mayor of London, and who was baptized 14 June, 1601, at St. Stephen's,

oleman Street, London, where he was ouried 14 November, 1645, having died intestate and without male issue at Salamanca.

G. E. C.

"GALLIMAUFRY" (9 th S. vi. 408, 494). Thanks to MR. MAYALL, it is now possible to make out what is meant. It turns out that the call- in calimafree is not a " preposition " in the grammatical sense, but is merely a prefix. The latest French etymological dictionary is that by Hatzfelcl, Darme- steter, and Thomas, published at Paris, and only just completed. It is not free from some remarkable errors (e.g., the mention of "A.-S. laic" s.v. 'Lai,' No. 2), but it contains an admirable treatise on the formation of the French language by way of preface. At p. 82 we are told that

" ca, cal, cali, coli, chari are different forms of a suffix* of obscure orgin, found only in French in Provencal. It usually has a depreciatory sense, as in : cabonser, calemlour, calembredaine, califourchon, camoitfiet, charivari, colimacon (Norrnan calima- chon)."

In Dannesteter's 'Historical French Gram- mar,' English edition, sect. 294, subsection 6, it is called " ca/-, a particle of unknown origin which appears in the forms : ca-, cal-, call-, calem-, coli-, chari-." I beg leave to recom- mend most strongly this highly scientific work. WALTER W. SKEAT.

ACHILL ISLAND (9 th S. vi. 489). We have no old form of this name, and therefore its

a slip of the pen for "prefixe." For it invariably comes at the beginning ; never at the end,
 * The word used is actually " suffixe "; evidently