302 Dr R. G. Latham on the 



Each of these cases involves a complex question in philolo- 

 gy : — the one the phenomena connected with the rate of 

 change; the other the uniformity of independent processes. 



These questions are likely to affect future researches more 

 than they had ajffected the researches hitherto established. 

 Another question has affected the researches hitherto esta- 

 blished more than it is likely to affect future ones. This is 

 the question as to the fundamental unity, or non-unity of 

 language. Upon this the present writer has expressed an 

 opinion elsewhere. At present he suggests that the more 

 the general unity of the human language is admitted, the 

 clearer will be the way for those who work at the details of the 

 different affiliations. As long as it is an open question, whether 

 one class of languages is wholly unconnected with others, any 

 connection engenders an inclination to arrange it under the 

 group previously recognised. I believe that this determined 

 the position of the Celtic in the Indo-European group. I have 

 great doubts whether if some affinity had been recognised from 

 the beginning, it would even have stood where it now does. 

 The question, when Dr Prichard undertook his investigations, 

 was not so much whether the Celtic was in the exact ratio 

 to any or all of the then recognised European languages in 

 which they were to each other, but whether it was in any re- 

 lation at all. This being proved, it fell into the class at 

 once. 



The present writer believes that the Celtic tongues were 

 separated from their mother-tongue at a comparatively early 

 period of the second stage ; i. e., when but few inflexions 

 had been evolved ; whilst the Classic, Gothic, Lithuano- Sla- 

 vonic (Sarmatian), and Indo-Persian (Iranian) were separated 

 at comparatively late periods of the same stage, i. e., when 

 many inflexions had been evolved. 



Hence he believes that, in order to admit the Celtic, the 

 meaning of the term Indo-European was extended. 



Regretting this (at the same time admitting that the Cel- 

 tic tongue is more Indo-European than any other), he be- 

 lieves that it is too late to go back to the older and more re- 

 stricted use of the term ; and suggests (as the next best 



