GHAR, which soon sinks down to HAR, a root of which we shall have to say a great deal when we come to examine the growth of mythological ideas,. but which for the present we may define as meaning to glitter, to be bright, to be happy, to burn, to be eager. In Greek this root appears in chairein,

to rejoice, &c.

Gothic, following Sanskrit as far as it could, fixed the same root as GAR, and formed from it geiro, desire; gairan and gairnjan, to desire, to yearn, derivatives which, though they seem to have taken a sense almost the contrary of that of the Greek chaírein, find valuable analogies in the Sanskrit haryati, to desire, &c.1 The High-German, following Greek as far as possible, formed kiri, desire; kerni, desiring, &c. So much for the history of one root in the four representative languages, in Sanskrit, Gothic, Greek, and High-German.

We now come to a second root, represented in Sanskrit by GAR, to shout, to praise. There is no difficulty in Greek. Greek had not spent its mediæ, and therefore exhibits the same root with the same consonants as Sanskrit, in gērýs, voice; gērýō, I proclaim. But what was Gothic to do, and the languages which follow Gothic, Low-German, AngloSaxon, Old Norse? Having spent their mediæ on ghar, they must fall back on their tenues, and hence the Old Norse kalla, to call, but not the A. S. galan, to yell. The name for crane is derived in Greek from the same root, géranos meaning literally the shouter. In Anglo-Saxon cran we find the corresponding tenuis. Lastly, the High-German, having spent its

1 See Curtius, Griechische Etymologie, i. 166, and objections, ibid. ii. 313. 8 Lottner, in Kuhn's Zeitschrift, xi. p. 165.

tenuis, has to fall back on its guttural breath; hence O. H. G. challôn, to call, and chrânoh, crane.

The third root, KAR, appears in Sanskrit as well as in Greek with its guttural tenuis. There is in Sanskrit kar, to make, to achieve; kratu, power, &c.; in Greek kraíno, I achieve; and kratýs, strong; kártos, strength. Gothic having disposed both of its media and tenuis, has to employ its guttural breath to represent the third series; hence hardus, hard, i. e. strong. The High-German, which naturally would have recourse to its unemployed media, prefers in the guttural series the Gothic breath, giving us harti instead of garti, and thereby causing, in a limited sphere, that very disturbance the avoidance of which seems to be the secret spring of the whole process of the so-called Dislocation of Consonants, or Lautverschiebung.

Again, there are in Sanskrit three roots ending in u, and differing from each other merely by the three dental initials, dh, d, and t. There is dhû (dhu), to shake; du, to burn; and tu, to grow.1

The first root, dhû, produces in Sanskrit dhû-no-mi, I shake; dhû-ma, smoke (what is shaken or whirled about); dhû-li, dust. In Greek the same root yields thyō, to rush, as applied to rivers, storms, and the passions of the mind; thyella, storm; thīmós, wrath, spirit; in Latin, fumus, smoke.

In Gothic the Sanskrit aspirate dh is represented by d; hence dauns, vapor, smell. In Old High-German the Greek aspirate th is represented by t; hence tunst, storm.

The second root, du, meaning to burn, both in a

1 See Curtius, Griechische Etymologie, i. 224, 196, 192.

material and moral sense, yields in Sanskrit dava, conflagration; davathú, inflammation, pain; in Greek daíō, dédaumai, to burn; and dýē, misery. Under its simple form it has not yet been discovered in the other Aryan dialects; but in a secondary form it may be recognized in Gothic tundnan, to light; Old High-German, zünden; English, tinder. Another Sanskrit root, du, to move about, has as yet been met with in Sanskrit grammarians only. But, besides the participle dûna, mentioned by them, there is the participle dûta, a messenger, one who is moved or sent about on business, and in this sense the root du may throw light on the origin of Gothic taujan, German zauen, to do quickly, to speed an act.

The third root, tu, appears in Sanskrit as tavîti, he grows, he is strong; in tavás, strong; tavishá, strong; tuvi (in comp.), strong; in Greek, as taÿjs, great. The Latin tôtus has been derived from the same root, though not without difficulty. The Umbrian and Oscan words for city, on the contrary, certainly come from that root, tuta, tota, from which tuticus in meddix tuticus,1 town magistrate. In Lettish, tauta is people; in Old Irish, tuath.2 In Gothic we have thiuda,3 people; thiudisks, belonging to the people, theodiscus; thiudiskó, ethnikōs; in AngloSaxon, theón, to grow; theód and theódisc, people; getheód, language (il volgare). The High-German, which looks upon Sanskrit t and Gothic th as d, possesses the same word, as diot, people, diutisc, popu

1 Aufrecht und Kirchhoff, Die Umbrischen Sprachdenkmäler, i. p. 155. 8 Lottner, Kuhn's Zeitschrift, vii. 166.

• Grimm, Deutsche Grammatik, first part, 3d edition, 1840, Einleitung, p. x. Excurs über Germanisch und Deutsch."

laris; hence Deutsch, German, and deuten, to explain, lit. to Germanize.

Throughout the whole of this process there was no transition of one letter into another; no gradual strengthening, no gradual decay, as Grimm supposes.1 It was simply and solely a shifting of the three cardinal points of the common phonetic horizon of the Aryan nations. While the Hindus fixed their East on the gh, dh, and bh, the Teutons fixed it on the g, d, and b. All the rest was only a question of what the French call s'orienter. To make my meaning more distinct, I will ask you to recall to your minds the arms of the Isle of Man, three legs on one body, one leg kneeling towards England, the other towards Scotland, the third towards Ireland. Let England, Scotland, and Ireland represent the three varieties of consonantal contact; then Sanskrit would bow its first knee to England (dh), its second to Ireland (d), its third to Scotland (t); Gothic would bow its first knee to Ireland (d), its second to Scotland (t), its third to England (th); Old High-German would bow its first knee to Scotland (t), its second to England (th), its third to Ireland (d). The three languages would thus exhibit three different aspects of the three points that have successively to be kept in view; but we should have no right to maintain that any one of the three lan

1 Grimm supposes these changes to have been very gradual. He fixes the beginning of the first change (the Gothic) about the second half of the first century after Christ, and supposes that it was carried through in the second and third centuries. "More towards the West of Europe," he says, "it may have commenced even at an earlier time, and have been succeeded by the second change (the Old High-German), the beginning of which is difficult to fix, though we see it developed in the seventh century." — Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache, i. 437.

guages shifted its point of view after having once assumed a settled position; we should have no right to say that t ever became th, th d, and d t.

Let us now examine a few words which form the common property of the Aryan nations, and which existed in some form or other before Sanskrit was Sanskrit, Greek Greek, and Gothic Gothic. Some of them have not only the same radical, but likewise the same formative or derivative elements in all the Aryan languages. These are, no doubt, the most interesting, because they belong to the earliest stages of Aryan speech, not only by their material, but likewise by their workmanship. Such a word as mother, for instance, has not only the same root in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, German, Slavonic, and Celtic, namely, the root ma, but likewise the same derivative tar,1 so that there can be no doubt that in the English mother we are handling the same word which in ages commonly called prehistoric, but in reality as historical as the days of Homer, or the more distant times of the Vedic Rishis, was framed to express the original conception of genitrix. But there are other words which, though they differ in their derivative elements, are identical in their roots and in their meanings, so as to leave little doubt that, though they did not exist previous to the dispersion of the Aryans, in exactly that form in which they are found in Greek or Sanskrit, they are nevertheless mere dialectic varieties, or modern modifications of earlier words. Thus star is not exactly the same word as stella, nor stella the same as the Sk. târâ; yet these words show that, previous to the confusion of the Aryan tongues, the

1 Sk. mâtâ; Greek μýrηp; Lat. mater; O. H. G. muotar; O. Sl. mati; Lith. moti; Gaelic, mathair.