Ib4 XTH2T0L0Gt or THB lyDO-PACIFIC IBLASm. 



the Indian and TJltraindian plionologieg and ideologies was incon- 

 siderable. It remains to enquire into the extent of its glossarial 

 influence. The connection between the tribes and languages of 

 Tibet and those of India, TJltraindia and Agenesia, appears also 

 to render a brief enquiry into the trans-Himalayan relations of the 

 Tibetan necessary for a satisfactory view of the ethnology of the 

 Indo- Pacific islands, I shall proceed to this, in the first place. 



The cia-IIinialayan Tibetoid languages have distinct ailinitiea 

 with those of the Tatar and more northern hordes of Asia, There 

 has evidently been more than one southern movement of the 

 Tibetans in different eras. Tibet haa always been exposed to tbo 

 mcuraions of the nomadic Tatai-s, who have, in tuni, spread them* 

 selves over the steppes between southern Tibet and the great 

 Deiiert* Tbe relations of Bhotian, in its present form, to the more 

 northern languages, may therefore throw some light on the pre- 

 historic changes which it suffered, and connect the Scythic revo- 

 lutions in which they originated, with the ethnology of the pro- 

 vinces to the south of the Himalayas, 



In preceding chapters it was remarked that Bhotian was so 

 highly Scythic in its ideology that it might be considered as ag 

 non-harmonic member of the Scythic family. The phonology 

 preserves a crude or Chineac character abnost to the Bame extent 

 as the Burman. The earlier form of Burman appears to have been 

 harsb and sonant like the purer Bhotian and both are esaentially 

 monjoflyllabic and non-harmonic. In this respjct they depart 

 greatly from the Scythic phonology and especially from its more 

 agglutinativ© varieties. But the basis of even the Ugro-Japanese 

 languages is monosyllabic with very httle disguise, and many of 

 them preaerve a strong sonant and aspirate tendency. It ia 

 probable therefore that at the remote period when the Ugrian 

 formation first modified the earlier and more Chinese form of 

 Tibeto-Burman, tho former was equaUy sonant mth the purer 

 Tibetan. In the Ostiak and even in the Turkish vocabularies . 

 words frequently occur entirely Bhotian in character. Some of 

 these are found Httle changed in Bhotian. I'or example the 

 Ostiak log-Ql, " hand'\ is evidently the parent of the Bhotian lag, 

 the Turkish haying the slender form Mik. The Turkisb syod 



