ON ETHNOLOGY. 
211 
most durable parts of language ; seventhly, numerals, especially the first ten, 
or at least the first five, for many nations appear to have borrowed the second 
live io the decade. As no human family wa.s ever witliout its stock of such 
words, and as they are never changed within the narrow domestic circle for 
other and strange words, they are almost indestructible possessions, anti it is 
almost onlyaniong tribes who have been entirely broken up and enslaved, so 
that the family relations have been destroyed, that this domestic language can 
have been wholly lost. Tribes and fauitlies separated from each other have 
been kaowD to have preserved such similar words for thousands of years in 
> degree of purity that admitted of an easy recognition of this sign of a com- 
nioD origin. 
A second class of words, which are common to nations who had attained 
woe degree of refinement before the era of their separation, consists of terms 
connect^ with simple arts, such as people acquire early in the progress of 
ri'dlizaiioD, as “to plough," “to weave," “to sew;” niuma of weapons, of 
metals, toob, articles of dress. It luw Iwerj observed that words of this class 
are often cummon to nations whose domestic vocabularies are ditfeveiit; and 
on the other hand, different when the domestic vocabulary is nearly the 
^0- It is evident that an investigation of these relations of languages may 
oc^ionally afford the means of throwing light on the history of nations*. 
1 shall now endeavour to point out some of the principal results which have 
Men obtained in amplification of ethnology from the different methods of 
reward! which I have surveyed, an<l particularly from researches into the 
relations of languages pursued on tiio principles above laid down. I shall 
not however exclude any portion of evidence that can be derived from other 
WDsiderations. such as the fomier proximity of nations or striking rcsera- 
itt their physical characters. 
Tlie principal part at least of the population of the old continent or great 
eminent of the world, if we exclude a few tribes chiefly confined to nunote 
'Hficu, the relations of whoso languages have not been fully elucidated, and 
dewisetbc woolly-haired natious of Africa, who inhabit countries within a 
ew degree of the equator, aud beyond that line, may be referred to four 
great families distinguished from each other by their languages. The four 
dyoastira of languages, if 1 may be allowed the expression, are the fol- 
i*ing;— 1 . 'Phtj Indu-Kuropean, sometimes termed ludo-Gernmn, and by 
writers Arian or Iranian languages. 2. Tho Turanian, nr as I shall term 
aiem, Ugro-Tartarian languages, or thu languages of Iligli-Asia and other 
^ens to be pointed out. 3. The (.lluneses and Indo-Chinese, or the mono- 
*}lliihic and unlnflocted languages. 4. Tho Syro-Arabi.in, often termed Sc- 
three first of these dynasties of languages are con- 
>iM to Europe and Asia, the fourth is common to Africa and tJiose parts of 
Asia which are near to Africa. 
!• T/w Ltdo-Euroinnn These langungits are the national 
lOionB of all those races who, at the time of tho great Cyrus, became and 
Have ever sinoe continued to be the dominant nations of ibu world. Wc have 
to except from this remark those instances in which certain Syro-Ara- 
•as or Ugro-Tartarian nations, under some extraordinary impulse, as the 
futbr^ of the Mohammedan fanaticism, have assumed or recovered a 
“ome of the weaker divisions of the Indo-European race. 
Indo-European languages and nations imiy be divided into many 
'liiFerent groupes. They might be dutributc'd in the order of their affinities, 
M. for example, haa made u»e of Ibis consideration in Iio. investigation of the 
Finns, with great wccess. See “ Fiunland luid seine Bewohner, von M. Riihs, 
m. . R 
