Page:A Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India Vol 1.djvu/25

Rh The next point, however, is that, even to a casual observer, it is clear that the seven languages as they stand at present contain materials not derived from Sanskrit, just as Italian and French, without ceasing to be modern dialects of Latin, contain many words of Teutonic origin. These materials may be classed under two heads. First, those which are Aryan, though not Sanskritic. Secondly, those which are neither Sanskritic nor Aryan, but something else. What this something else is, remains to be seen; it is, in fact, the great puzzle of the whole inquiry: it is the mathematician’s, an unknown quantity.

§ 2. First, then, we have to explain what is meant by the term, “Aryan, though not Sanskritic.” It may be accepted as a well-established fact, that the Aryan race entered India not all at once, nor in one body, but in successive waves of immigration. The tribes of which the nation was composed must therefore have spoken many dialects of the common speech. I say “must,” because it is contrary to all experience, and to all the discoveries hitherto made in the science of language, to suppose otherwise. All the races of the great Indo-European family, whether they migrated into India, Persia, or Europe, have been found, however far back they can be traced, to have spoken numerous dialects of a common language; but this common language itself only existed as one homogeneous speech, spoken without any differences of pronunciation or accent by the whole race, at a time far anterior to the earliest date to which they can be followed. Indeed, so much is this the case, that writers of high repute have not hesitated to declare that no such homogeneous speech ever existed at all; that, in fact, there never was one original Iranian, or one original Celtic or German language. I am inclined to give in my adhesion to this view, holding that the idea of one common language is the creation of modern times, and the effect of the spread