ETHNOLOGY OIT TUB IKDO-PACTFIC TSLAlfDa. 



llie Caucasian on the west, we find strong Dmvirian affinities, and 

 it hm olliers willi the N. E, Asian languages and even with 

 Ainerican which appeal- lo helon*? lo a proto-Scythic (tevelopmenr. 

 The iang-uajjesj of China and Tibet on the one side and ihoae of 

 E^ypt aTid Africa generally on the o:her, show that the interme- 

 diate region must have undei-gone great linguietic changes before 

 even the earliest variety of I ndo- Australian was ialroJuced or 

 formed. From Tibet and Egyptmn— the salient members of tlie 

 old formations on ihe two sides of the Irano-Senti lie region — lo 

 Draviro-Aufiti-alian, the ]ihonelie advance alone is so great that it 

 necei'm>ily imithos a sucoL'Ssioii of formations, although it does 

 not follow that they were developed in this province. The 

 J>raviro-Anstmlinik phonology tsarclmtc Scythico-Afrtean and not 

 proper vScythic, Semitic^ Iranian or Caucasian. The ideology k 

 mainly Scythic of a very archaic diameter, or rather proto- 

 Scythicj, for it is not merely a hraach of the Tatar or even of the 

 Ugrian. The connection is tlirousjifi an older and more Americo- 

 Afrtcan, Caucaso-Semiiie, aud Iranian form of the inversive 

 development, and through that form in one of its early and crude 

 stages. Iranian in its basis is more closely akin in some respects 

 to Ugrian than Dravirian, the pronouns for example being iha 

 same. Dravirian again Jias special Caiicaso-Semitic and Caucaso- 

 African affijitties. The conclusion appears to be that it was a 

 form of I he proto-Scythic or harmonic and inversive development 

 that preceded not only the Tular but the Iranian and the allied 

 Ugroid Scyihic in Irania, and from its archaic character and 

 early migration lo the south west of Asia and thence to India and 

 Asonesia, had independent relitions with the Caucasian, the 

 Semitic and the proio-Iranian on the one side, and with the proto- 

 Scythic languages of Middle and Northern Asia on the other. In 

 one point of vifw it is the oldest and earliest formation of the 

 Scythic class that is now extent, iis position in Asia and Asoncsia 

 combining with its geitemi character to prove this. In another 

 point of view it is a distinct and more ancient formation, but of 

 the same development. 



The glosisaries by themselves a (lord considerable evidence that 

 the Scythic or prylo-yeytf(ic forma ttons that prevailed in S. W. 

 Asia, sju'ciid tutu Afncii and Jrtdia^ and aifcclcd the vocabularies 



