We can imagine the suppressed excitement of the philologists of that
time as they began to discover in that remote Eastern language, the
sacred language of the Vedic hymns, words such as ‘vid’ (to see),
‘tara’ (a star), ‘sad’ (to sit), ‘bhratar’ (a brother). For it
was not only the evident relation of Sanskrit to the languages of
Europe that was exciting. Sanskrit, which had preserved the forms
of its words more unchanged than any other Aryan tongue, threw a
brilliant light on the close relations existing between those other
languages themselves. For instance, although the sisterhood of words
such as the Greek ‘onoma’, Latin ‘nomen’, and _name_, had long
been suspected, yet there had been no way of distinguishing such a
sisterhood from purely accidental resemblances like Hebrew ‘gol’,
Greek ‘kaleo’, and _call_, and the connection between ‘brother’
and ‘frater’ was by no means obvious. But when the older Sanskrit
form ‘bhratar’ was brought to light, the gap between these words
was at once bridged. It could be seen at a glance how the three of
them, _brother_, _bhratar_, and _frater_, had started from the same
original form and diverged through the years. Gradually all doubt was
blown away, and Sanskrit, the language of a race with whom Europeans
had thought, and for the most part still think, that they had nothing
whatever in common, stood revealed as an obvious relative of Latin,
Greek, Modern English, and practically all the other languages of
Europe. It seemed, therefore, to follow that our ancestors and those
of the Hindoos were at one time living together, that our ancestors
and theirs were, in fact, the same.
At first it was thought that Sanskrit itself was the parent-language
from which all the others had derived, and that the nations of Europe
were descended from a body of Hindoos, some of whom had migrated
westwards. We called ourselves “Aryans” because the people who had
once spoken Sanskrit were known as “Aryas”, or worshippers of the
God of the Brahmins. But soon the accurate methods of analysis
which philology had now acquired made it plain that this could not
be so. Therefore a still older language was postulated and called
indifferently the Aryan, the Indo-Germanic, or the Indo-European
parent-language. If there was a language, there must have been a
people who spoke it, and attention was soon focused on the character,
civilization, and whereabouts in space and time of the people who
spoke the lost Indo-European, or “Aryan” parent-language.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account