The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 01 : $b Prolegomena; Egypt, Mesopotamia
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 01 : $b Prolegomena; Egypt, Mesopotamia
World history
To many philologists, including some who still hold that the
probabilities favour an Asiatic origin of the race, it now seems
advisable to adopt a name of less doubtful import, and of late it has
become quite usual to substitute for the word “Aryan” the compound
word “Indo-European,” or, what is perhaps better, “Indo-Germanic.”
Such a word, it is clear, summarises the fact that the Indians in the
far East and the Germanic race in the far West have a language that
is fundamentally the same, without connoting any theory whatever as
to the origin or other relations of these widely scattered peoples.
The name thus has an undoubted scientific status that makes it
attractive, but nevertheless it is too cumbersome to be accepted at
once as a substitute for the word “Aryan” in ordinary usage. Nor,
indeed does there seem to be any good reason why such substitution
should be made. Words very generally come in the course of time to
have an application which their original derivation would not at all
justify, and there is no more reason for ruling out the word “Aryan,”
even should it be proven absolutely that Asia was not the original
cradle of the Indo-Germanic race, than there would be for discarding
a very large number of words of Greek and Latin derivation that are
familiarly employed in the various modern European languages. Indeed,
it may be taken for granted that the generality of people to whom the
word “Aryan” is familiar have no such preconception aroused in their
minds by the word as it conveys to the mind of special scholars, and
in any event where a distinct disavowal is made of any ethnological
preconceptions in connection with the word, one is surely justified for
convenience sake in continuing to use the word “Aryan” as a synonym for
the more complicated term “Indo-Germanic.”
CHAPTER VI
ON PREHISTORIC CULTURE
It has been said that history proper is usually regarded as having
to do solely with the deeds of civilised man, but in point of fact
the scope of history as written at the present day necessarily falls
far short of comprehending the entire history of civilisation. Before
the dawn of recorded history man had evolved to a stage in which
the greater number of the greatest arts had been attained. That is
to say, he was possessed of articulate language. He had learned
to clothe and to house himself. He knew the use of fire. He could
manufacture implements of war and of peace. He had surrounded himself
with domesticated animals. He added to his food supply by practising
agriculture. He had established systems of government. He knew how
to embellish his surroundings by the practice of painting and of
decorative architecture, and last, and perhaps greatest, he had
invented the art of writing, and carried it far toward perfection.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account