need not despair。 Serious psychology is yet young and has only just joined hands with physiology。 Religious students are still hampered by mediaevalisms such as Body and Soul； and by the perhaps scarcely less mythological segregations of Intellect； Emotion； Will。 But new facts （See the 〃Proceedings〃 of the Society for Psychical Research； London； passim； and especially Vols。 VII。…XV。 For a valuable collection of the phenomena of mysticism； see William James； 〃Varieties of Religious Experience〃； Edinburgh； 1901…2。） are accumulating； facts about the formation and flux of personality； and the relations between the conscious and the sub…conscious。 Any moment some great imagination may leap out into the dark； touch the secret places of life； lay bare the cardinal mystery of the marriage of the spatial with the non…spatial。 It is； I venture to think； towards the apprehension of such mysteries； not by reason only； but by man's whole personality； that the religious spirit in the course of its evolution through ancient magic and modern mysticism is ever blindly yet persistently moving。
Be this as it may； it is by thinking of religion in the light of evolution； not as a revelation given； not as a realite faite but as a process； and it is so only； I think； that we attain to a spirit of real patience and tolerance。 We have ourselves perhaps learnt laboriously something of the working of natural law； something of the limitations of our human will； and we have therefore renounced the practice of magic。 Yet we are bidden by those in high places to pray 〃Sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin。〃 Mystical in this connection spells magical； and we have no place for a god…magician： the prayer is to us unmeaning； irreverent。 Or again； after much toil we have ceased； or hope we have ceased； to think anthropomorphically。 Yet we are invited to offer formal thanks to God for a meal of flesh whose sanctity is the last survival of that sacrifice of bulls and goats he has renounced。 Such a ritual confuses our intellect and fails to stir our emotion。 But to others this ritual； magical or anthropomorphic as it is； is charged with emotional impulse； and others； a still larger number； think that they act by reason when really they are hypnotised by suggestion and tradition； their fathers did this or that and at all costs they must do it。 It was good that primitive man in his youth should bear the yoke of conservative custom； from each man's neck that yoke will fall； when and because he has outgrown it。 Science teaches us to await that moment with her own inward and abiding patience。 Such a patience； such a gentleness we may well seek to practise in the spirit and in the memory of Darwin。
XXVI。 EVOLUTION AND THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE。
By P。 GILES； M。A。； LL。D。 （Aberdeen）； Reader in Comparative Philology in the University of Cambridge。
In no study has the historical method had a more salutary influence than in the Science of Language。 Even the earliest records show that the meaning of the names of persons； places； and common objects was then； as it has always been since； a matter of interest to mankind。 And in every age the common man has regarded himself as competent without special training to explain by inspection （if one may use a mathematical phrase） the meaning of any words that attracted his attention。 Out of this amateur etymologising has sprung a great amount of false history； a kind of historical mythology invented to explain familiar names。 A single example will illustrate the tendency。 According to the local legend the ancestor of the Earl of Errolla husbandman who stayed the flight of his countrymen in the battle of Luncarty and won the victory over the Danes by the help of the yoke of his oxenexhausted with the fray uttered the exclamation 〃Hoch heigh！〃 The grateful king about to ennoble the victorious ploughman at once replied：
〃Hoch heigh！ said ye And Hay shall ye be。〃
The Norman origin of the name Hay is well…known； and the battle of Luncarty long preceded the appearance of Normans in Scotland； but the legend nevertheless persists。
Though the earliest European treatise on philological questions which is now extantthe 〃Cratylus〃 of Plato；as might be expected from its authorship； contains some acute thinking and some shrewd guesses； yet the work as a whole is infantine in its handling of language； and it has been doubted whether Plato was more than half serious in some of the suggestions which he puts forward。 （For an account of the 〃Cratylus〃 with references to other literature see Sandys' 〃History of Classical Scholarship〃； I。 page 92 ff。； Cambridge； 1903。） In the hands of the Romans things were worse even than they had been in the hands of Plato and his Greek successors。 The lack of success on the part of Varro and later Roman writers may have been partly due to the fact that； from the etymological point of view； Latin is a much more difficult language than Greek； it is by no means so closely connected with Greek as the ancients imagined； and they had no knowledge of the Celtic languages from which； on some sides at least； much greater light on the history of the Latin language might have been obtained。 Roman civilisation was a late development compared with Greek； and its records dating earlier than 300 B。C。a period when the best of Greek literature was already in existenceare very few and scanty。 Varro it is true was much more of an antiquary than Plato； but his extant works seem to show that he was rather a 〃dungeon of learning〃 than an original thinker。
A scientific knowledge of language can be obtained only by comparison of different languages of the same family and the contrasting of their characteristics with those of another family or other families。 It never occurred to the Greeks that any foreign language was worthy of serious study。 Herodotus and other travellers and antiquaries indeed picked up individual words from various languages； either as being necessary in communication with the inhabitants of the countries where they sojourned； or because of some point which interested them personally。 Plato and others noticed the similarity of some Phrygian words to Greek； but no systematic comparison seems ever to have been instituted。
In the Middle Ages the treatment of language was in a sense more historical。 The Middle Ages started with the hypothesis； derived from the book of Genesis； that in the early world all men were of one language and of one speech。 Though on the same authority they believed that the plain of Shinar has seen that confusion of tongues whence sprang all the languages upon earth； they seem to have considered that the words of each separate language were nevertheless derived from this original tongue。 And as Hebrew was the language of the Chosen People； it was naturally assumed that this original tongue was Hebrew。 Hence we find Dante declaring in his treatise on the Vulgar Tongue （Dante 〃de Vulgari Eloquio〃； I。 4。） that the first word man uttered in Paradise must have been 〃El；〃 the Hebrew name of his Maker； while as a result of the fall of Adam； the first utterance of every child now born into this world of sin and misery is 〃heu；〃 Alas！ After the splendidly engraved bronze plates containing； as we now know； ritual regulations for certain cults； were discovered in 1444 at the town of Gubbio； in Umbria； they were declared； by some authorities； to be written in excellent Hebrew。 The study of them has been the fascination and the despair of many a philologist。 Thanks to the devoted labours of numerous scholars； mainly in the last sixty years； the general drift of these inscriptions is now known。 They are the only important records of the ancient Umbrian language； which was related closely to that of the Samnites and； though not so closely； to that of the Romans on the other side of the Apennines。 Yet less than twenty years ago a book was published in Germany； which boasts itself the home of Comparative Philology； wherein the German origin of the Umbrian language was no less solemnly demonstrated than had been its Celtic origin by Sir William Betham in 1842。
It is good that the study of language should be historical； but the first requisite is that the history should be sound。 How little had been learnt of the true history of language a century ago may be seen from a little book by Stephen Weston first published in 1802 and several times reprinted； where accidental assonance is considered sufficient to establish connection。 Is there not a word 〃bad〃 in English and a word 〃bad〃 in Persian which mean the same thing？ Clearly therefore Persian and English must be connected。 The conclusion is true； but it is drawn from erroneous premises。 As stated； this identity has no more value than the similar assonance between the English 〃cover〃 and the Hebrew 〃kophar〃； where the history of 〃cover〃 as coming through French from a Latin 〃co…operire〃 was even in 1802 well…known to many。 To this day； in spite of recent elaborate attempts （Most recently in H。 Moller's 〃Semitisch und Indogermanisch〃； Erster Teil； Kopenhagen； 1907。） to establish connection between the Indo… Germanic and the Semitic families of languages； there is no satisfactory evidence of such relation between these families。 This is not to deny the possibility of such a connection at a very early period； it is merely to say that through the lapse of long ages all trustworthy record of such relationship； if it ever existed； has been； so far as present knowledge extends； obliterated。
But while Stephen Weston was publishing； with much public approval； his collection of amusing similarities between languagessimilarities which proved nothingthe key to the historical study of at least one family of languages had already been found by a learned Englishman in a distant land。 In 1783 Sir William Jones had been sent out as a judge in the supreme court of judicature in Bengal。 While still a young man at Oxford he was noted as a linguist； his reputation as a Persian scholar had preceded him to the East。 In the intervals of his professional duties he made a careful study of the language which was held sacred by the natives of the country in which he was living。 He was mainly instrumental in establis