GTBKOtOOT OF THE tNJ»0-Pi«IFIC ISLAITDS. 165 



riea of China anci Tibet, Many other mtennediate liwigiiages nmy 

 have existed and aome are probably atiU preserved.'* In the 

 earlier chapters of this Part the lint between the Ultraindo- 

 Gkngit^c laagnages and the Tibetan was more broadly and dia- 

 tiiictly defined. In chap. L the former was marked out in the 

 follo™g passage, "The next Ultraindian formation wna the 

 Tibeto-Ultraindian which is distinguished from the Mon-Anam by 

 its Tibetan or poat-poaitional and inveraive character. It em- 

 braces the Burman, the Karen, the Yuma dialects from Kyen to 

 Kuki, the Manipuri, Naga, Mikir, Singpho, Mishmi and Abor- 

 Miri. It also spread westward up the Gangetic basin and into 

 that of the Sutlej ; the Garo, Bodo» Dhinial, the Akha, Changlo 

 and the other Himalayan languages, as far westward as the 

 Milchanang and Tibberkad, belonging to this formation so far as 

 they are not Dravirian, Tibetan or Arian, and so far as they do 

 not preserve remnants of the Mon-Anam formation, the latter 

 being slight on the north side of the Gangetic valley compared 

 with the south or Vindyan, This Tibeto-Ultraindian formation I 

 conceive must have originated at a very ancient period in eastern 

 Tibet or the adjacent territory now Chinese^ because it is inter- 

 mediate between Chinese and Tibetan and more closely connected 

 with the latter than the former." 



The Si-fan vocabukries vrhich we owe to Mr. Hodgson have 

 partially removed the veil which hnng over eastern Tibet, and 

 my anticipation that the ethnology of this region when explored 

 would prove to be of extraordinary interest, has been verified. 

 Much remains to be ascertained before we mn enter on a full 

 investigation of the relation of the Si-fan dialects to the Tibetan 

 and Ultraindian, but enough has been published to satisfy us of 

 the important fact that the Ultraindo-Gangetic knguages ar& 

 more closely connected with the Si-fan than with the proper 

 Tibetan dialects. It will now be convenient to distinguish the 

 latter by the national name of Bhot and to use Tibetan as includ- 

 ing both Bhotian and Si-fan tribes and languageg, Tlie term 

 Tibcto-Ultraindian or Tibeto-Burman may be applied to the 

 whole family — Tibetan, Ultraindian and Gangetic — ^and Ultraindo- 

 Gangetic to the southern branch; excluding the eouthern Bhotians. 



