[280] Concerning the evident tradition of the dispersion in Hesiod, “Theog.” v. 836, vide Bryant’s “Mythology,” iii. 51, et seq.
[281] This appears to me to be borne out by the Sanscrit root “ar, to plough,” being seemingly cognate with “æs, æris,” and with the produce corn = “arista,” aroum, aratrum, Greek ἀρσμηα, &c.
Sanscrit, “ar, to plough,” vide note 1 in Brace’s “Ethnology.” Vide also Max Müller, “Science of Language,” id. Vide also Max Müller, “Chips,” ii. p. 45.
“The name of the plough (in Egypt) was ΖHβιξ, ploughed land, appears to have been αρτ, a word still traced in the Arabic ‘hart,’ which has the same import; and the Greek ἀρητρον and Roman aratrum appears to indicate, like the αρουρα, an Egyptian origin.”—Wilkinson’s Ancient Egyptians, i. 45.
If “ar,” as in “αριστος,” should be proposed as the primitive root, it must be after rejection of the evidence of secondary derivation; but does not our common parlance still run to the comparison of virtues with metals, “good as gold,” “hard as iron,” “true as steel.” Why then at a later period should not brass have become the expression for best in the brazen or warlike age, when courage was the virtue principally regarded? If this is accepted, “Ἀρης,” or Mars, so far from being the root, would be a tertiary derivation—the embodiment and deification of what was regarded as best in the brazen age. Gladstone (“Homer,” ii. p. 225), shows that Mars was a deity of late invention, and not one of the traditionary deities. Rawlinson, vide supra, [p. 164], identifying Ares with Nimrod.
Bunsen (“Egypt,” iii. 466), says in a note, “Arya” in Indian means lord. Its original meaning was equivalent to “upper noble.” The popular name “Arja” is derived from it, and means “descended from a noble.” I will only add that “Ari” in Egyptian means “honourable” (in Nofruari). But “ar” might mean to plough; for the Aryans were originally and essentially an agricultural, and therefore a peasant race. Agriculture at the time we are contemplating would have been the most honourable employment (supra, [p. 329]), it would not have been “an agricultural and therefore peasant” employment till insecurity brought about the state of dependence and vassalage. The Aryans would have been noble as being of the Japhetic race.
[282] I.e., “The teaching and government of the University remained in the Faculty of Arts,” and not in the faculty of theology or law or modern philosophy. I have for my own purposes of condensation been obliged to take certain unpardonable liberties of transposition in the above abstract, for which I can only plead my necessity. I should not in any case have so exceeded in quotation, were this very masterly address at all accessible, but, as far as I know, it is only to be found in the Catholic University Gazette, November 16, 1854.
In order to show the full significance of these extracts from Dr Newman, and also their bearing on points still to be discussed, I will append the following suggestive passage from Sir H. Maine’s “Ancient Law,” p. 22:—“It is only with the progressive societies that we are concerned, and nothing is more remarkable than their extreme fewness. In spite of overwhelming evidence, it is most difficult for a citizen of Western Europe to bring thoroughly home to himself the truth that the civilisation which surrounds him is a rare exception in the history of the world. The tone of thought common among us, all our hopes, fears, and speculations, would be materially affected, if we had vividly before us the relation of the progressive races to the totality of human life. It is indisputable that much the greatest part of mankind has never shown a particular desire that its civil institutions should be improved since the moment when external completeness was first given to them by their embodiment in some permanent record.... There has been a material civilisation, but instead of the civilisation expanding the law, the law has limited the civilisation.”
I must also express my belief that if Mr Lowe had read the lecture of Dr Newman, he would have very much modified the views he enunciated in his lecture on “Primary and University Education,” at the Philosophical Institution at Edinburgh.—Times, November 4, 1867.
[283] “Ancient Law,” p. 123.