xXHKOLoar OF THE ipruo-rAcmc islajtus. 



an least of the Caucasian and Iranfan tangoagcs, long before ihe 

 Turke and Mongols advanced fmin ilw remote east, were allied to 

 the Ugrian, Samoiede, and Yenjseinn. If the Caneasian and 

 ITgrian vocabularies yield strong evidence of the two formations 

 having been not only archaically connected but in contact in 

 periods !ong aubsequcnt to tbeir first devctopment, the Draviriun 

 vocabularies pr-serve proofs of a similar connection and contact 

 vith the Caucasian and the Ugrian, whilo their direct Cbincee 

 and N. E. Asiatic affinirips point to a more eastern mother-land 

 than Irania or any other poriion of S. W. Asia. If the evidence 

 of language may be trusted, the Dravirians were one of the oldest 

 nomadic races who advanced from Upper Asiti lolraniaand India. 

 The character and position of the Spmitic-Libyan formation and of 

 the African tribes renders it probable that ibc Draviro-Auytraliana 

 found fcrmationifi of this kind established in 8. W. Asia, and that 

 by mixture with them ihe Semitico-Libvan traits of Drav iro- Aus- 

 tralian were acquired. The pre-historic revolutions, combinations 

 and amalgamations amongst the nomadic hoi des of Asia, probably 

 present too complicated a subject to be unravelled by ethnology. 

 The JanguageS of India have affinities not only with all the Tura- 

 nian formation?, but with the Ivmmn, the Afrieo-Seniitic, the 

 Tibttan and the Uhraiudiaii, To read the etlinic history of India 

 we must first decipher that of Asia and Africa in its leading inci- 

 dents, for the Draviro-Australian formation strikes its room into the 

 Chinese even more deeply in some dn-eclions than the Scylhic 

 languages. All attempts to trace the Dravirian formation to its 

 ultimate sources must be illusory, because its antiquity is ob- 

 viously so great that from the time it existed in its earliest 

 development to the era when it assumed the form it now has in 

 the principal languages of the South, there must have been a 

 gradual extinction of many cisJndus dialects and languages 

 in which snceessive varieties of ihe formation were evolved, 

 and of many trans-Indiis ones which illusljuted the formation 

 in its prc-Indian history and development, or were instrumen- 

 (al in producing changes in it subsefjuently. Between it and 

 i 11 the adjacent formations there is a great break atid even 

 the chain of connection with Scylhic wants many links. On 

 the whole, we mnat be Mtisfficd with the conculsion that, strong 



• 



