[38] Such a book as we have imagined would form a natural sequel to the principles of comparative grammar as laid down by Bopp, etc. It would differ from a mere comparative dictionary in the arrangement, showing the nature and extent of modification which each word had undergone--where, for instance, Grimm’s laws of change hold good, where not; the cases of the survival of archaic forms (agreeable to Grimm’s _second law_); and, if they could be discovered as the result of such a classification, the determining causes of such survival among any of the different races. [39] I have been told that the late Lord Strangford, a great linguist, and a comparative philologist to boot, could always find amusement for an idle half-hour in a book which the reader would probably think of, if asked to name the most uninteresting of created things--I mean Bradshaw, English or foreign; and his interest lay in extracting the hidden meaning and history which lay concealed in these lists of geographical names. [40] It is found that the peculiarity of curling or not curling in hair depends upon the form, the form in _section_, of the individual hairs. The woolly hairs are oval in section, the straight ones round. [41] Lenormant, _Manual of the Ancient History of the East_, vol. i., p. 55. [42] Not that this particular foothold has descended to the Turks from early times. See the next paragraph. [43] Lenormant, _Manual_, i. 343. It should be remarked that the authority of Justin on such a point is not high. [44] Mariette’s date is B.C. 5004, Lepsius’s 3892, Wilkinson’s only 2700. Wilkinson’s chronology, however, founded upon the theory of _contemporaneous dynasties_ in the lists of Manetho, has now been generally rejected. [45] Shûmîr was a portion of the country inhabited by the Accadians. [46] See Chapter XIII. [47] Gen. xi. 2. [48] Gen. xiv. [49] Kung-foo-tse was his real name. [50] ‘Fool! why journeyest thou wearisomely in thy antiquarian fervour to gaze on the stone pyramids of Geeza, or the clay stones of Sacchara? These stand there, as I can tell thee, idle and inert, looking over the desert, foolishly enough, for the last three thousand years; but canst thou not open thy Hebrew BIBLE, or even Luther’s version thereof?’ _Sartor Resartus._ [51] For example, the Hindee _rupee_, the Latin _pecunia_, and our _fee_. [52] As the Sanskrit _gôpa_, ‘a prince,’ the Slavonic _hospodar_ (from _gôspada_) contains the word _gô_, our ‘cow,’ and means the protector of the cattle; from the same root, Sanskrit _gavya_, ‘pasturage,’ Saxon _gê_, ‘county,’ Greek _gaia_, or _gê_, ‘earth.’ [53] See above, page 94. [54] Cattle were probably originally communal property: and were appropriated to individuals at a later stage than other movable goods. In the Roman law we find that they could only be transferred by the same forms as were required for the conveyance of land: being classed amongst the ‘res mancipi.’