VI THE ARYAN QUESTION 283 



place from a purely anthropological point of 

 view, the first point which has struck me is 

 that the problem is far more complicated and 

 difficult than many of the disputants appear 

 to imagine ; and the second, that the data 

 upon which we have to go are grievously in- 

 sufficient in extent and in precision. Our histori- 

 cal records cover such an infmitesimally small 

 extent of the past life of humanity, that we obtain 

 little help from them. Even so late as 1500 B.C., 

 northern Eurasia lies in historical darkness, ex- 

 cept for such glimmer of light as may be thrown 

 here and there by the literatures of Egypt and of 

 Babylonia. Yet, at that time, it is probable that 

 Sanskrit, Zend, and Greek, to say nothing of other 

 Aryan tongues, had long been differentiated from 

 primitive Aryan. Even a thousand years later, 

 little enough accurate information is to be had 

 about the racial characters of the European and 

 Asiatic tribes known to the Greeks. We are 

 thrown upon such resources as archaeology and 

 human palaeontology have to offer, and notwith- 

 standing the remarkable progress made of late 

 years, they are still meagre. Nevertheless, it 

 strikes me that, from the purely anthropological 

 side, there is a good deal to be said in favour of 

 the two propositions maintained by the new 

 school of philologists ; first, that the people who 

 spoke " primitive Aryan " were a distinct and 

 well-marked race of mankind ; and, secondly, that 



