Gabelentz has, I am informed, lately shown that the Samoeid tongues come within the same class;—a statement which, without having seen his reasons, I am fully prepared to admit.
Now what applies to the Samoeids[24] applies to two other classes as well:—
This gives us one great stock, conveniently called Turanian, whereof—
- 1. The Mongolians—
- 2. The Tungusians—of which the Mantshús are the best known representatives—
- 3. The Ugrians, falling into the Lap, Finlandic, Majiar and other branches;—along with
- 4. The Hyperboreans, or Samoeids, Yeniseians, and Yukahiri—are branches.
And this stock takes us from the North Cape to the Wall of China.
VI. From Ireland to the Western parts of Asia.—The rule already referred to, viz. that an island must always be considered to have been peopled from the nearest part of the nearest land of a more continental character than itself, unless reason can be shown to the contrary, applies to the population of Ireland; subject to which view, the point of emigration from Great Britain must have been the parts about the Mull of Cantyre; and the point of immigration into Ireland must have been the province of Ulster, and the parts that are nearest to Scotland.
Upon this doctrine I see no reason whatever to refine, since the unequivocal fact of the Scotch and Irish Gaelic being the same language confirms it. Here, however, as in so many other cases, the opinions and facts by no means go together; and the notion of Scotland having been peopled from Ireland, and Ireland from some other country, is a common one. The introduction of the Scots of Scotland from the west, when examined, will be found to rest almost wholly on the following extract from Beda:—“procedente tempore, tertiam Scottorum nationem in parte Pictorum recepit, qui duce Reudâ de Hiberniâ progressi, amicitiâ vel ferro sibimet inter eos has sedes quas hactenus habent vindicârunt; à quo videlicet duce, usque hodie Dalreudini vocantur: nam eorum linguâ Daal partem significat.”
Now, as this was written about the middle of the eighth century, there are only two statements in it that can be passed for contemporary evidence, viz. the assertion that at the time of Beda a portion of Scotland was called the country of the Dalreudini; and that in their language daal meant part. The Irish origin, then, is grounded upon either an inference or a tradition; an inference or a tradition which, if true, would prove nothing as to the original population of either country; since, the reasoning which applies to the relation between the peninsula of Malacca and the island of Sumatra applies here. There, the population first passed from the peninsula to the island, and then back again—reflected so to say—from the island to the peninsula. Mutatis mutandis this was the case with Scotland and Ireland, provided that there was any migration at all.
Upon this point the evidence of Beda may or may not be sufficient for the historian. It is certainly unsatisfactory to the ethnologist.