MAY MOLLER ON THE HOME OF THE .AB,Y.AB.* PROFESSOR MAX
/RIMER mentions that in the year 1849 he presented to the Acadimie des Inscriptions at Paris an essay on the early civilisation of the Aryas which received the Prix Volney, but he was unable at the time to find a pub- lisher for the work. The study of early civilisations is not now, as in 1849, in danger of dying of neglect. Its popularity is dangerously great; for the eagerness with which the public reads everything that promises to shed light upon the early condition of mankind tempts writers to advance novel theories which are often insufficiently supported by facts, and which we may safely say would not have been addressed to a learned audience. Against this tendency Professor Max Muller protests in the present volume. He warns us that we must learn to bear with our horizons, and to be content with general and even dim outlines of a landscape so remote.
Even those who are disposed to agree with them in their main contention, will admit that certain recent advocates of the theory of a European home of the Aryas have shown an audacity in theorising and a carelessness in the use of facts, which justify the warnings of the veteran investigator. The greatest offender is Herr Penka, although some Englishmen have followed him at no great interval. In two cleverly written and entertaining books, he has endeavoured to prove beyond reach of doubt or question that Scandinavia was the original home of the Aryas. By selecting Scandinavia, he has done an evil turn to the European hypothesis ; and by his in- cautious appeals to the argument from language, he has delivered himself into Professor Max Milller's hands. There is not a single word in the original Aryan speech which specially points to Scandinavia, and there are some significant omissions. If the Aryas started from Scandinavia, we should expect that they would have a common word for " sea," and
that they would know something of fishes. But the South- Eastern and North-Western branches of the Aryas do not possess a common word for either. Herr Penka ventures on the broad statement that the fauna and flora of the united Aryas, as represented by their speech, agree with those of Scandinavia. To this Professor Max Muller replies:— "Dr. Penka gives a long list of names of animals which he declares to be urarish. If by urarish' he means what exists in all languages of the North-Western branch, it is simply a misnomer, and in that case nothing can be proved by these words. If he means by urarish' what is common to the North-Western and South-Eastern branches, then his facts are wrong or doubtful, so far as the following animals and trees are concerned Fox,' ' lynx," otter' udra ' is very doubtful), hedgehog," beaver' (' babhru ' is not beaver,' and fiber' may be, like ' fibra,' from full:1o') hart, roe (not risya '), squirrel, smarten, seal, wild-cat, eel, starling, crane, quail, beech, oak, fir, horse, elm, alder, asp, ash, maple, yew. All these names belong to the North-Western branch only. If they were common to the North-Western and South-Eastern branches, they would indeed be of great interest ; but as they are not, how can any one say that the fauna and flora of the united Aryas, as represented by these words, agree with the fauna and flora of Scandinavia ? "
When Herr Penka's confident dogmatism has been rebuked, the whole case for a European home has not been met ; nor has a case been made out for an Asiatic home. Professor Max Muller admits that complete proof cannot be given ; and he
now refrains from mentioning any particular place, contenting himself with the general description " somewhere in Asia." The arguments on which he relies are not very convincing.
The words of the original Aryan speech do not assist either him or his antagonists. Many words, such as the names for " whiter," " snow," " ice," " cow," " sheep," " goat," " dog," " bird," &c., are common to the South-Eastern and North. Western branches ; and we can compose from them a more or less complete picture of the early life of the united Aryas ; but they do not tell us whether they lived in Asia or in Europe ; for the designated animals are all found, whether indigenous or naturalised, not only in Asia, but in Europe also, and in other parts of the world.
As the home of the Aryas was certainly not in the Land of the Seven Rivers, Professor Max Muller does not use, as an argument, the greater primitiveness of Sanskrit, although he ma intains it as strongly as ever; so we have not to decide between him and his deputy, who stated recently that Sanskrit has less right to be regarded as a faithful representation of the parent speech than its sister-languages in Europe. The arguments relied upon are three in number. First, there are two streams
• Biographies of Words. and no Rome of the Arm. By F. Max Muller. Loudon : Longman', Green, and Or. 1938,
of languages from a parent stem—one tending South-East to India, the other North-East to Europe. The points where the two streams naturally intersect point to Asia. Secondly, the earliest centres of civilised life were in Asia. Thirdly, in his- torical times large ethnic waves, rising from Central Asia, overwhelmed Europe, such as the invasion of the Huns in the fourth, and of the Mongols in the thirteenth century. The last argument seems to belong rightfully to the advocates of the European hypothesis. The general course of the ethnic wave in historical times has been from the North towards the South and East. The bands of warriors who made their way from the North into the countries of the Mediterranean, and even into Asia, showed a power which Asiatics have never shown in Europe in historical times, of establishing themselves as ruling aristocracies in the lands into which they wandered.
If we are to draw any conclusion from what has happened in historical times, it is more probable that men from the West should travel to the East, and settle there, than that Asiatics should migrate to the more inclement climates of Northern Europe. For this reason among others, Dr. Schrader, to whose excellent work, Sprachvergleichung and Urgeschichte, Professor Max Muller does full justice, has come to the con- clusion, contrary to his former belief, that the origin of the Indo-Germanic peoples is to be looked for in the West rather than in the East.
We have dwelt so long upon the controversial chapter, that we have left ourselves little space to speak of the " Biographies of Words," which are presented with all the author's accustomed skill and felicity of illustration. The chapter entitled, " Words in their Infancy," possesses a special interest. Every word, he says, in its infancy expressed a sensible idea, and was only promoted to express an abstract idea when men had themselves. grown out of the infantile stage. He does not make an exception even in the case of the word " man," which, in opposition to Curtius, he thinks comes from a root that means primarily remaining, and only in a secondary sense remembering or thinking. In the following passage we obtain an interesting glimpse of the early career of some well-known. words :—
" Whatever words we take which now express the most abstract and spiritual concepts, they have all passed through their infancy and early youth, and during that time were flesh and bone, and little else. What was the original meaning of to consider ? It meant star-gazing.' In Latin it is frequently used, together with contemplate, to contemplate, and that is derived from templum, a space marked out in the heavens for the observation of auguries. The Latin pereontari, to interrogate, to examine,' comes from contus, ' a pole used for punting, and for feeling the bottom of a. river.' When we hear of an exploded error, we are apt to think of an explosion, as if the exploded error was like an exploded bomb, burst and harmless. But to explode meant originally to clap the hands till an actor took off his mask or left the stage. We see nothing strange when we speak of weighing our arguments, or pondering the etymology of a word ; why should we wonder at the French using penser—i.e., pensare—to weigh, in the sense of ' thinking'? We speak of well-weighed statements,' and in the same sense the Romans said ezactus, from ezigere,' to drive out the tongue of a balance, to weigh carefully.' Such a careful weighing was called exagium, the French essai, the English essay, which is always supposed to be a careful and exact statement of a subject."
In writing of the language and civilisation of the past, the author in this, as in former works, is always careful to show their connection with the present. He. has been censured for this, and it has been said that he thereby suggests modern ideas. But surely, as he says, his readers, and not he, are to blame if they think of a modern city like London because he connects " purl " with voxic. Even if we accept Professor Sayce's picture of the early Aryas, who represents them as living in the Stone Age in miserable beehive huts of wattled mud, clothed in skins, and, although practising a rude kind of agriculture, unacquainted with the working of metals, they were the fathers and founders of modern civilisation, and they used some of the same words to denote their rude efforta which we employ to describe their perfect developments. To have this kept prominently in view is a real gain to the historical sentiment, and, we may add, to the sentiment of humanity; and the rude races of the present owe a debt for the more respectful and kindly treatment which they now receive to the scholars who have taught us that the germs of our language and of our institutions come to us from rude races of the past. The thought is never absent from Pro- fessor Max Miiller's writings that he is dealing with a chapter of our own history while he discourses of the institutions and religion of the early Aryas; and it gives moral dignity and human interest to everything that he writes. His latest -volume is not unworthy of his reputation, and ought to find many readers.
Previous page
