VOLUME XIV SLICE IV Independence, Declaration of to Indo-European Languages (continued 8)

The right of pre-emption under Mahommedan law is the right of a third person, in certain circumstances, to step in and take the place of a buyer, at the same price and on the same conditions as the buyer has purchased. Pre-emption. It applies only to the purchase of real property, and it can only be exercised upon one of the three following grounds: (1) That the claimant is owner of property contiguous to that sold; (2) that he is a co-sharer in the property of which a share is being sold; (3) that he is a participator in some right over the property, such, for example, as a right of way over it. The claimant must announce his claim as soon as he hears of the sale, and he must follow up this announcement by a further claim in the presence of witnesses and of the seller, or, if possession has been transferred, of the buyer.

Mahommedan law, so far as it is administered by the courts of British India for Sunnites of the Hanafite school—that is, for the great bulk of Mahommedans—has attained a fair degree of precision, owing to the care bestowed on their decisions by the judges of those courts, and the assistance derived from Mahommedan lawyers. But much difficulty is experienced as soon as we come to deal with Mahommedans of any other description. No doubt in India any clearly-established custom prevalent amongst a well-defined body of persons would be recognized, or any rule of law founded upon texts which they accepted as authoritative. But it is not always easy to determine when these conditions have been satisfied. And to allow Mahommedans to set up a standard of rights and duties different from that of the bulk of their correligionists without this proof would lead not only to confusion but injustice. There is the further difficulty that Mahommedan law, as applied to any Mahommedans except those of the Hanafite school, has as yet been comparatively little studied by modern lawyers, so that Shiah System. very little that is certain can be said about it. There is, however, a considerable body of Shiites in India whose legal system undoubtedly differs in some material particulars from that of the Sunnites. The Mahommedans of Oudh are generally Shiites, and Shiah families, mostly of Persian descent, are to be found in other parts of India. The following points seem clear. A marriage which the parties agree shall last for a fixed time, even for a few hours only, is a valid marriage, and at the expiration of the time agreed on the marriage ceases to exist. The relatives of the deceased, whether male or female, and whether tracing their connexion through males or females, may be sharers or residuaries. Both as sharers and residuaries the children can claim to take the place of their parents in the succession upon the principle of what we call representation. If there are parents or descendants of the deceased, and the sharers do not exhaust the property, the surplus is distributed amongst the sharers of that class in proportion to their shares. If the property is not sufficient to pay in full the shares of all the sharers, the shares do not abate rateably; e.g. as between daughters and the parents, or the husband, or the wife of the deceased the whole deduction is made from the daughters’ share.

Authorities.—(Mahommedan Law), Neil Baillie, Digest of Mahommedan Law (London, 1865); Sir R. K. Wilson, Introduction to the Study of Mahommedan Law (London, 1894); Digest of Anglo-Mahommedan Law (London, 1895); Charles Hamilton, The Hedaya translated (London, 1791); Syed Ameer Ali, Lectures on Mahommedan Law (2 vols., Calcutta, 1891, 1894); Mahomed Yusoof, Tagore Law Lectures (Calcutta 1895); Alfred v. Kremer, Culturgeschichte des Orients (2 vols., Vienna, 1875).

(W. Ma.)

INDIAN MUTINY, THE, the great revolt of the Bengal native army in 1857, which led to the transference of Indian government from the East India company to the crown in 1858. The mediate cause of the Mutiny was the great disproportion between the numbers of British and native troops in India, which gave the sepoys an exaggerated notion of their power; its immediate causes were a series of circumstances which promoted active discontent with British rule.

During the century which elapsed between the victory of Plassey and the outbreak at Meerut, the East India company relied mainly on native troops with a stiffening of British soldiers—especially artillery—for the successful Disaffection in the Native Army. conduct of its wars. The warlike Hindu and Mahommedan races supplied excellent fighting material, when led by British officers, and the sepoy army took a distinguished part in every Indian battle, from Assaye to Gujarat. At the close of Lord Dalhousie’s administration (1856) British India was held by some 233,000 native and some 45,000 British troops—roughly a proportion of 5 to 1. It was already clear to some of the men who knew India best that this was a dangerous state of things, though when the Mutiny broke out the relative numbers were 257,000 native to 36,000 British soldiers. It had long been a fundamental principle of Indian government that the sepoy would always be true to his salt—knowing, as Macaulay wrote in 1840, that there was not another state in India which would not, in spite of the most solemn promises, leave him to die of hunger in a ditch as soon as he had ceased to be useful. But the history of the sepoy army might have shown that this was an over-estimate of its loyalty. As early as 1764 it was necessary to stamp out mutiny by blowing thirty sepoys away from guns. In 1806 the family of Tippoo Sultan produced a dangerous mutiny at Vellore, which was nipped in the bud by the prompt action of Gillespie and his dragoons. In 1824 the 47th Bengal infantry refused to march when it was ordered for service in Burma, and after being decimated by British artillery was struck out of the army list. In 1844, after the disasters of the Afghan war had shaken the prestige of British arms in India, no less than seven native regiments broke into open mutiny over grievances both real and fancied; and this time the old stern measures were not adopted to stamp out military disobedience. Lord Ellenborough often said that a general mutiny of the native army was the only real danger with which the British empire in India was threatened, and his warning was solemnly repeated by Sir Charles Napier. A still more explicit warning was uttered by General Jacob, who declared in 1853 that the normal state of the Bengal army was a state of mutiny, and wrote to The Times as follows: “There is more danger to our Indian empire from the state of the Bengal army, from the feeling which there exists between the native and the European, and thence spreads throughout the length and breadth of the land, than from all other causes combined. Let government look to this; it is a serious and most important truth.”

The causes which, in the middle of the 19th century, were thus tending to sap the long-tried fidelity of the sepoy army were partly military and partly racial. The professional conditions of the sepoy’s career, especially Its causes in 1857. in Bengal, were no longer so tempting as they had been in the first generations of the company’s rule. The pay and privileges of the sepoy were steadily being diminished, and the increased demands made on the army by the great extension of the company’s territory were by no means grateful to the average Bengal sepoy. Owing to the silladar system, under which the Indian sowar provided his own horse and provender in return for a monthly wage, the Indian cavalry were almost to a man in debt, and therefore favoured any attempt to upset the existing régime, and with it to wipe out the money-lender and his books; and the general enlistment order passed in July 1856, for the purposes of the war in Persia, made the Hindu sepoys afraid of losing caste by crossing the sea.

The Indian government failed to take sufficient account of the social and religious feelings of their native soldiers, whilst a rigid insistence on the principle of seniority had greatly diminished the efficiency of the British regimental officers. Out of 73 mutinous regiments, only four colonels were found worthy of other commands. At the same time, there were deeper reasons for discontent with British rule, which specially affected, the classes from which the Bengal sepoys were drawn. Chief among these was Dalhousie’s policy of annexation, which brought under British dominion such small states as Satara, Nagpur and Jhansi, and finally the kingdom of Oudh. The insistence on the right of lapse, i.e. the refusal to allow an adopted, son to inherit a native throne, and the threat of annexation on purely humanitarian grounds seriously alarmed the native princes of India, besides creating a class of malcontents, among whom the Nana Sahib, the adopted heir of the peshwa, made himself most infamous. The annexation of Oudh, which was the chief recruiting ground of the Bengal army, probably caused wider disaffection in the ranks of that army than any other act or omission of the government. There can also be little doubt that the social reforms of Lord Dalhousie and his predecessors had disturbed men’s minds in Bengal. Thus the Brahmans were offended at the prohibition of suttee and female infanticide, the execution of Brahmans for capital offences, the re-marriage of widows, the spread of missionary effort and the extension of Western education. The Mahommedan zemindars were injured by the reassessment of the land revenue, which was carried through in the interests of the ryots, and the power of the zemindars was formidable, while that of the ryots was negligible; though it must be remembered that the peasantry as a whole gave no assistance to the mutineers. To all these causes must be added—not least important in dealing with orientals—the widespread feeling since the Afghan disaster that the star of the company was in the descendant, and that there was truth in the old prophecy that the British would rule in India for a bare century from Plassey (1757). Bazaar rumours of British reverses in the Crimea and in Persia increased the temptations for a general rising against the dominant race.

To this accumulation of inflammatory materials a spark was put in 1857 by an act of almost incredible folly on the part of the military authorities in India. The introduction of the Minié rifle, with its greased cartridges, was The greased cartridges. accompanied by no consideration of the religious prejudices of the Bengal sepoys, to whom, whether Hindus or Mahommedans, the fat of cows and pigs was anathema. It was easy for agitators to persuade the sepoys that the new cartridges were greased with the fat of animals sacred to one creed or forbidden to another, and that the British government was thus engaged in a deep-laid plot for forcing them to become Christians by first making them outcasts from their own religions. The growth of missionary enterprise in India lent colour to this theory, which was supported by the fact that no precautions had been taken to grease the Indian cartridges with a neutral fat, such as that of sheep and goats. The researches of Mr G. W. Forrest in the Indian government records have shown that the sepoys’ fears of defilement by biting the new cartridges had a considerable foundation in fact. At a court-martial in 1857 Colonel Abbott, inspector general of ordnance, gave evidence that “the tallow might or might not have contained the fat of cows.” No attempt, in fact, had been made to exclude the fat of cows and pigs, and apparently no one had realized that a gross outrage was thus being perpetrated on the religious feelings of both Hindu and Mahommedan sepoys. The low-caste natives employed in the arsenals knew what grease was actually being employed, and taunted the Brahman sepoys with the loss of caste that would follow their use of the new cartridges. Refusals to accept the suspected cartridges were soon heard in the Bengal army. The numerous agitators who had their own reasons for fomenting mutiny rose to the occasion, and In the first months of 1857 the greater part of the Bengal presidency was seething with sedition. At this time took place the mysterious distribution of chapatis, small cakes of unleavened bread, which had previously been known in connexion with the mutiny at Vellore (1806). “From village to village, from district to district, through hill-land and lowland, the signal—unexplained at the time, inexplicable still—sped; and in village after village, in district after district, the spreading of the signal was followed by the Increased excitement of the people.”

The first signs of the approaching trouble were displayed at the great military station of Barrackpur, 16 m. from Calcutta, in January 1857. The minds of the native regiments quartered there were maddened by rumours of the defilement which the new Minié cartridges would entail upon them, and incendiary fires broke out in the lines. The trouble was allayed by the tact of General Hearsey, who reported the incident to the Indian government on the 24th of January. A fortnight later he wrote, as the result of his inquiries, “We have at Barrackpur been dwelling upon a mine ready for explosion.” At Berhampur, 100 m. to the north, on the 27th of February, the 19th Bengal infantry refused on parade to take their percussion caps, on the ground that to bite the new cartridges would defile them. The absence of any European troops made it impossible to deal with this act of mutiny on the spot. The defaulting regiment was marched down to Barrackpur for punishment. On the 29th of March, two days before its arrival, a sepoy named Manghal Pandi, from whom the mutineers afterwards came to be spoken of as “Pandies,” drunk with bhang and enthusiasm, attempted to provoke a mutiny in the 34th Bengal infantry, and shot the adjutant, but Hearsey’s personal courage suppressed the danger. Two days later the 19th were publicly disbanded, but no further punishment was attempted. This was partly due to Lord Canning’s personal inclination to temper justice with mercy, but partly also to the fact that there was no adequate European force at hand to execute a severer sentence. Bengal had been recklessly depleted of white troops, and there was only one European regiment between Calcutta and Dinapur, a distance of 400 m. Canning sent at once for more British troops from Burma. Meantime new accounts of refusals to use even the old cartridges came from distant parts of Hindostan, from Umballa under the very eyes of Anson, the commander-in-chief, and from Lucknow, the capital of the newly annexed kingdom of Oudh. Lord Canning, the governor-general, who had at first hoped that he had only to deal with isolated cases of disaffection, at last recognized that the plague was epidemic, and that only stern measures could stay it. But before he could take the necessary steps, there reached Calcutta the news of the outbreak at Meerut and the capture of Delhi.

Meerut, 25 m. from Delhi, was an important military station, under the command of Colonel Archdale Wilson: the district was commanded by General Hewitt, one of the old and inefficient officers whom the rigid system of The outbreak at Meerut. seniority had placed in so many high commands. At Meerut were quartered, besides one regiment of native cavalry and two of native infantry, a strong force of British troops, horse, foot and guns. Nevertheless, 85 men of the native cavalry regiment, driven to despair by the persistent rumours of the danger to their caste, refused on the 24th of April to accept their cartridges. For this offence they were condemned to ten years’ imprisonment with hard labour on the roads, and on the 9th of May they were publicly stripped of their uniforms and marched off to gaol. The next day was a Sunday; and in the evening, whilst the British troops were parading for church, the native cavalry armed themselves, galloped to the gaol and released their comrades. Almost simultaneously the two infantry regiments shot down their officers and broke into open revolt. The badmashes, or criminal class, broke forth from their quarter and began to burn and plunder the dwellings of the British. A few of the mutineers took part in this work; but the great majority of them, fearing the vengeance of the British troops, hastened to move off, rather a mob than an army, upon the Delhi road. There is a general agreement that if a man like Gillespie or Nicholson had been in command of the station, the strong force at his disposal would have enabled him to strike such a deadly blow at the fleeing mutineers as might have stamped out the Mutiny. But Hewitt was too old and Wilson was lacking in initiative; the opportunity was lost, and no attempt was made to do more than clear the cantonments.

So many of the chief actors in the Mutiny on the native side carried their secrets into dishonoured graves that it is impossible to know exactly what schemes the household of the king of Delhi had concerted with the disaffected sepoys. The Revolt of Delhi. But when the mutineers reached Delhi they were at once joined by the city mob and the king’s guards in proclaiming a revival of the Mogul empire. For a few hours the native troops of the British garrison awaited the turn of events; but when it became apparent that the British troops from Meerut were afraid to move, there was a general flame of revolt, and Delhi at once became the headquarters of the Mutiny. Most of the British officers and residents were massacred then or afterwards. The great magazine was gallantly defended for a time by nine Britons under Lieutenant Willoughby, and was blown up by them when all hope of relief had vanished. A young telegraph clerk sent the news to Umballa, continuing to signal until he was cut down at his post. Before the authorities in Calcutta and Lahore could take any steps to deal with the long-prophesied danger, the whole of the North-West Provinces were in revolt. Fortunately the two men on whom the chief responsibility fell in this great crisis were equal to their task. Canning in Calcutta, John Lawrence in the Punjab, were men indeed equal to any burden; and the stress of the Mutiny, ending once and forever the bad old system of seniority, brought to the front so many subordinates of dauntless gallantry and soldierly insight that a ring of steel was rapidly drawn round the vast territory affected. Lawrence saw that the surest way to prevent the Mutiny from spreading from the sepoy army of Bengal to the recently conquered fighting races of the Punjab was to hurl the Sikh at the Hindu; instead of taking measures for the defence of the Punjab, he acted on the old principle that the best defence is attack, and promptly organized a force for the reduction of Delhi, with the ardent co-operation of born leaders like John Nicholson, Neville Chamberlain and Herbert Edwardes. Anson, the commander-in-chief, died of cholera before he had had a chance to act on Lawrence’s telegram, “Clubs, not spades, are trumps.” He was succeeded by Sir Henry Barnard in command of the Delhi field force, then amounting to about 3000 British troops with 22 field guns, in addition to a few Gurkhas and Punjab native troops. The loyalty of the independent Sikh chiefs, headed by Patiala, and the stern measures which had been taken with the sepoy regiments enabled Lawrence to reinforce this little army with every available man and gun from the Punjab, in addition to Sikh and Pathan levies. It was to the insight of Lawrence and the splendid organization of the Punjab province—the spoilt child of the Indian government, as it had been called in allusion to the custom of sending thither the best of the Indian officials and soldiers—that the reduction of Delhi and the limitation of the outbreak were due. Meantime Canning was manfully playing his part at Calcutta. In the hour of danger he was undismayed, as in the hour of victory he was just and merciful. He telegraphed for reliefs from every available quarter, fortunately being able to divert the troops then on their way to China. The native armies of Bombay and Madras remained loyal, and the former in particular—thanks to Lord Elphinstone—furnished valuable reinforcements. Sir Colin Campbell, a veteran soldier whose laurels had been won in many battles from the Peninsula to the Crimea, was despatched from England to take command of the army in India. But even before he could arrive, the outspread of the Mutiny had already been checked by the gallantry and skill of a mere handful of Britons and their faithful native allies.

Canning and Lawrence, at opposite ends of the disaffected districts, alike perceived that Delhi was the centre of peril, and that all other considerations must be subordinated to striking a decisive blow at that historic city. Both The Siege of Delhi. flung to the winds the European rules of warfare, which highly trained officers like Wilson had allowed to hamper their movements. “Make as short work as possible of the rebels,” wrote Canning. “Where have we failed when we acted vigorously?” asked Lawrence. Though the nominal commanders of the army which captured Delhi were in turn Barnard, Reed and Wilson, the policy thus stated by Canning and Lawrence was really carried out by their subordinates—Baird Smith, Nicholson and Chamberlain. The Meerut troops, at last roused from their inaction, joined Barnard on the 7th of June, after a successful affair with the mutineers, and the next day the action of Badli-ki-Serai enabled the British force to occupy the famous Ridge, which they never abandoned till the final assault. At first the British troops, outnumbered by more than three to one by the mutinous regiments alone, were rather besieged than besiegers. Baird Smith indeed urged an immediate assault upon Delhi, on the ground that audacity is the best policy in Indian warfare; but it was not until the arrival of Nicholson on the 7th of August with the last Punjab reinforcements that the force was strong enough, in the opinion of its commander, to take offensive action. On the 14th of September, after three days of artillery preparation, the assault was delivered, under Nicholson’s leadership. Two practicable breaches had been made by the siege guns, and a party of engineers under Home and Salkeld blew in the Kashmir gate. The assault was successful, in so far as a firm lodgment was made in the city, though the loss of Nicholson was a heavy price to pay for this success. Wilson actually thought of retreating; but Baird Smith and Chamberlain insisted on perseverance, and the city was captured after six days’ hard fighting. The mutineers were completely cowed; the king of Delhi was taken and reserved for trial; and his sons were shot by Captain Hodson, after unconditional surrender, an act which has since been the theme of much reprobation, but which commended itself at the time to Hodson’s comrades as wise and justifiable. The siege of Delhi, which was the turning-point of the Mutiny, had lasted for more than three months, during which thirty minor actions had been fought in the almost intolerable heat of the Indian midsummer.

The stern determination of the British troops, which alone made possible the reduction of Delhi with so inadequate a force, was intensified, if possible, by the ghastly story of Cawnpore. That important military station, lying The Massacre at Cawnpore. on the Ganges on the confines of Oudh, was under the command of Sir Hugh Wheeler, an old but still efficient and experienced officer. It was garrisoned by about 3000 native troops, with a mere handful of white soldiers. When the news of the Meerut outbreak reached Wheeler, who had already noted many symptoms of disaffection in his own station, he was placed in a very difficult position. Under his care was a large body of non-combatants—women and children in great numbers among them. To occupy the one defensible position in the station, the magazine by the river with its vast military stores and its substantial masonry walls, would have involved steps which Wheeler regarded as certain to precipitate an outbreak. It was then thought that, if the sepoys mutinied, they would march off to Delhi, and Wheeler contented himself by throwing up a rude entrenchment round the hospital barracks, where he thought that the Europeans would be safe during the first tumult of a rising. All might have fallen out as he anticipated, had it not been that the Nana Sahib, the adopted heir of the late peshwa, was rajah of Bithur in the neighbourhood. This young Mahratta, since known to universal execration as the arch-villain of the Mutiny, was secretly burning with a sense of injury received from the Indian government. He was also ambitious; and when, on the 4th of June, the Cawnpore garrison broke into open mutiny, he prevailed on them to stay and help him to carve a new kingdom out of the company’s territory, instead of throwing in their lot with the Delhi empire. From the 6th to the 27th of June the handful of British soldiers, who composed the garrison of a fortification that could not have resisted a serious assault for a single hour, held out with the greatest gallantry in hope of relief. When this hope had died away, they surrendered to the Nana on his solemn promise that all their lives should be spared and that they should have a safe conduct to Allahabad. The Nana, partly urged by his native cruelty, partly, no doubt, by the wish to commit his followers beyond all possibility of composition, massacred the entire garrison in the boats which should have taken it down the river, reserving only some two hundred women and children for a later death. These poor victims were confined in a house known as the Bibigarh. On the 15th of July, when Havelock’s avenging army was within a march of Cawnpore, they were all hacked to death and their bodies—some still faintly breathing—were thrown down the adjacent well which is to-day one of the most famous monuments of British rule in India. No single act of the Mutiny elicited such a storm of fierce anger among the British, both those who were fighting in India and those who supported them at home; for none was a more terrible vengeance taken, though the Nana himself escaped from his pursuers.

Meanwhile Lucknow, the capital of Oudh, was the scene of a historic defence. It was the headquarters of Sir Henry Lawrence, one of the most far-seeing of Indian statesmen, who was well aware of the mutinous state of The Defence of Lucknow. the native army. On the 18th of April he warned Lord Canning of some manifestations of discontent, and asked permission to transfer certain mutinous corps to another province. On the 1st of May the 7th Oudh infantry refused to bite the cartridge, but on the 3rd they were disarmed by other regiments. When the news of the outbreak at Meerut reached Lucknow, Sir Henry Lawrence recognized the gravity of the crisis and summoned from their homes two bodies of pensioners, one of sepoys and one of artillerymen, to whose loyalty, and to that of the Sikh sepoys, the successful defence of the residency was largely due. This position was immediately fortified. On the 30th of May the native troops broke into mutiny. On the 4th of June there was a mutiny at Sitapur, a large and important station 51 m. from Lucknow. This was followed by another at Fyzabad, one of the most important cities in the province, and outbreaks at Daryabad, Sultanpur and Salon. Thus in the course of ten days English authority in Oudh practically vanished. On the 30th of June Sir Henry Lawrence ordered a reconnaissance in force from Lucknow, which met the enemy at Chinhat; but the native sepoys and artillerymen turned traitors, and Sir Henry was forced to retreat to the residency, where the siege now began. The first attack was repulsed on the 1st of July, when the separate position of the Machchhi Bhawan was evacuated, and all the troops concentrated in the residency. The entrenchments surrounding this building covered some 60 acres of ground, and included a number of detached houses and buildings, knit together by ditches and stockades. In a military sense the position was indefensible. The garrison consisted of 1720 fighting men, of whom 712 were native troops, 153 civilian volunteers, and the remainder were British officers and men. This small force had to defend 1280 non-combatants. At the very beginning of the siege Sir Henry Lawrence was fatally wounded by a shell, and died on the 4th of July, thus depriving the defence of its guiding spirit. The command then developed upon General Inglis, who met the incessant attacks of the enemy with counter-sorties. On the 21st of July news was received that General Havelock was advancing, had defeated the Nana, and was master of Cawnpore; but it was still more than two months before even the first relief of Lucknow was achieved. During those two months every device was employed, by direct assault and by mining operations, to reduce the garrison, who held out nobly, meeting assault with sortie and mine with countermine. But the loyalty of the native troops began to waver as the weeks dragged by and no sign of relief appeared. On the 23rd of September, however, the sound of distant guns in the direction of Cawnpore was heard, and on the 25th General Havelock’s relieving force entered Lucknow. During the 87 days of the siege the strength of the garrison had diminished to 982, and many of these were sick and wounded. Against these were arrayed six thousand trained soldiers and a vast host of undisciplined rabble. For nearly three months their heavy guns and musketry had poured an unceasing fire into the residency entrenchment from a distance of only 50 yds. During the whole time the British flag flew defiantly on the roof of the residency. The history of the world’s sieges contains no more brilliant episode.

On the 5th of June the troops at Benares mutinied, but were disarmed by Neill; and on the 6th of June the 6th native infantry at Allahabad mutinied and shot down their officers, but the fort was held until the arrival of First Relief of Lucknow. Neill, who promptly restored order. On the 30th of June Sir Henry Havelock, who had been appointed to the command of the relieving column, arrived at Allahabad from Calcutta, and on the 7th of July he set out for the relief of Lucknow. His force consisted of some two thousand men all told, of whom three-quarters were British. On the 12th of July he fought the action of Fatehpur, and gained his first victory, though the irregular cavalry misbehaved and were subsequently disarmed. On the 15th the village of Aong was captured, and on the 16th the Nana’s force was utterly shattered in the battle of Cawnpore. In nine days Havelock had marched 126 m. and fought three general actions under a broiling sun in the hottest season of the year; but the women and children whom it had been his object to save had already been massacred. Leaving Neill in command at Cawnpore, Havelock started out again on the 29th of July with ten light guns and 1500 men in the desperate attempt to relieve Lucknow, which was 53 m. away. On the 29th he gained two victories at Unao and Busherutgunge, but considering himself too weak to advance, he fell back two marches upon Mangalwar. This decision was badly received by his troops, who were burning to avenge their countrywomen, and by General Neill, whom Havelock was obliged to reprimand for insubordination. Being slightly reinforced, he advanced on the 5th of August, and again turned the enemy out of Busherutgunge, but was again obliged by cholera to retreat to Mangalwar; and on receipt of news from Neill that the enemy were assembling at Bithur, he returned to Cawnpore, and abandoned for the time the attempt to relieve Lucknow. On the 16th of August he defeated the mutineers at Bithur. At this point General Havelock was joined by Sir James Outram, who would have superseded him in the command had not Outram himself, with unequalled generosity, proposed to accompany Havelock only in his civil capacity as chief commissioner of Oudh and to serve under him as a volunteer. On the 21st of September Havelock started on his second attempt to relieve Lucknow, and won the victory of Mangalwar. On the 23rd another victory was gained at Alam Bagh, and news reached the force of the fall of Delhi. From Alam Bagh there were four possible routes of advance to the residency, and Outram considered that the route chosen by Havelock, lying through the streets of Lucknow, involved unnecessary losses to the troops. Neill was killed in the streets, and the little force lost in all 535 officers and men; but on the 26th of September it entered the residency, and the first relief of Lucknow was accomplished.

But the two thousand men who had thus entered the residency entrenchment under Havelock and Outram, though sufficient to reinforce the garrison and save it from destruction, were not strong enough to cut their way back to safety, Second Relief of Lucknow. hampered with the women and children and wounded, amounting to 1500 souls, and the siege now recommenced upon a larger scale. Havelock’s task, however, was accomplished, and Outram now took command of the residency. A detachment had been left in the Alam Bagh, which was short of provisions; some attempts were made to open up communication with it, but without success. Subsequently it was reinforced from Cawnpore. Upon the fall of Delhi the troops before that city were freed for the operations in Oudh, and on the 24th of September a column of 2790 men under Colonel Greathed left Delhi. On the 29th a successful action was fought at Bulandshahr, and on the 10th of October the column reached Agra. Here they were surprised by the enemy, but drove them off with considerable loss. On the 14th of October the column left Agra under Colonel Hope Grant, and on the 26th reached Cawnpore, where news was received that the commander-in-chief was coming to take command of the operations. Sir Colin Campbell had been sent out from England to suppress the Mutiny, and had assumed command of the Indian army on the 17th of August, but could not immediately proceed to the front. It was his first task to reorganize the administrative and transport departments; only on the 27th of October did he leave Calcutta. On the 3rd of November he reached Cawnpore, and on the 12th marched upon Lucknow under the guidance of Thomas Henry Kavanagh, who had made his way from the residency disguised as a native for that purpose. Campbell had with him 4500 men with whom to raise a siege maintained by 60,000 trained soldiers occupying strong positions. On the 12th of November the force reached the Alam Bagh, and on the 14th advanced upon Lucknow, proceeding on this occasion across the open plain by the Dilkusha and Martinière instead of through the narrow and tortuous streets of Lucknow. On the 16th the Sikandra Bagh was stormed; on the following day Campbell joined hands with Outram and Havelock, and the relief of Lucknow was finally accomplished.

Sir Colin Campbell now decided to withdraw the garrison and women and children from the residency, and to hold Lucknow by a strong division operating outside the city. The residency was evacuated on the night of the 22nd of Capture of Lucknow. November; but the success of the operations was marred by the death of Havelock. On his return to Cawnpore Campbell found that General Windham was being attacked at that place by the Gwalior contingent. On the 6th of December he defeated the Gwalior contingent in the battle of Cawnpore, though he had only 5000 men against the enemy’s 25,000. His next task was to clear his line of communications with Delhi and the Punjab, and this he accordingly undertook. Lord Canning now decided that the next step should be the reduction of Lucknow, on the ground that it, like Delhi, was a rallying point of the Mutiny, and that its continuance in the hands of the enemy would mean a loss of prestige. General Franks’ column advanced to Lucknow from the eastern frontier of Oudh, defeating the enemy in four actions. Meanwhile Outram had held his own at the Alam Bagh for over three months with only 4000 men against 120,000 rebels. An offer of help from Nepal had been accepted in July, and now Jung Bahadur, the prime minister of Nepal, was advancing with 10,000 Gurkhas to aid in the operations against Lucknow; but the lateness of his arrival delayed the opening of the siege until the 2nd of March 1858. The Martinière was captured on the 9th of March and the Begum Kothi on the 11th. On the 14th the Imambara was stormed, and the Kaisar Bagh, and on the 16th the residency was once more in British possession. The enemy were thoroughly routed, but Campbell lost the opportunity of pushing the victory home by forbidding Outram to cross the bridge in pursuit if he thought he would lose a “single man,” and by sending the cavalry away from the environs of the city at the critical moment. Upon the fall of Lucknow Lord Canning’s Oudh proclamation was issued, confiscating almost the entire lands of the province, and ensuring only their lives to those rebels who should submit at once. Outram considered the terms of this proclamation dangerously severe, and Lord Ellenborough, president of the board of control, thus criticized it in a hasty despatch, the publication of which necessitated his own resignation. It was afterwards acknowledged that the Oudh proclamation, interpreted as Canning meant it should be, was a wise piece of statesmanship. After the fall of Lucknow Canning insisted that Sir Colin Campbell should take immediate action against the rebels in Oudh and Rohilkhand, and a number of petty and harassing operations were carried out by detached columns; but Campbell moved too slowly to bring his guerrilla opponents to book, and the rebellion was really brought to a conclusion by Sir Hugh Rose’s brilliant campaign in Central India.

Though the two great princes of Central India, Sindhia and Holkar, wisely and fortunately remained true to the British, troops belonging to both of them joined the mutineers. The Gwalior contingent of Sindhia’s army mutinied in The Central India Campaign. the middle of June, and on the 1st of July Holkar’s troops revolted at Indore, and the resident, Henry Durand, was forced to leave the residency. The rani of Jhansi also rose in rebellion, to become known as “the best man upon the side of the enemy.” The rising in this quarter received little attention until January 1858, when Sir Hugh Rose was given the command of two brigades, to act in concert with Sir Colin Campbell, and he immediately began a campaign which for celerity and effectiveness has rarely been equalled in India. His principle was to go straight for the enemy wherever he found him, and pursue him until he had exterminated him. He was hampered by none of that exaggerated respect for the rebels which earned Sir Colin Campbell the nickname of Old Khabardhar (Old Take-Care); but carried to an extreme the policy of audacity. Advancing from Bombay Sir Hugh Rose relieved Saugor on the 3rd of February, after it had been invested by the rebels for upwards of seven months. On the 3rd of March he forced the pass of Madanpur, and took the whole of the enemy’s defences in rear, throwing them into panic. On the 21st he began the siege of Jhansi, the stronghold of the mutineers in Central India, with a garrison of 11,000 men. During the course of the siege Tantia Topi, the most capable native leader of the Mutiny, arrived with a fresh force of 20,000 men, and threatened the British camp; but Sir Hugh Rose, with a boldness which only success could justify, divided his force, and while still maintaining the siege of the fort, attacked Tantia Topi with only 1500 men and completely routed him. This victory was won on the 1st of April, and two days later Sir Hugh carried Jhansi by assault. On the 1st of May the battle of Kunch was fought and won in a temperature of 110° in the shade, many of the combatants on both sides being struck down by heat apoplexy. On the 22nd of May the battle of Kalpi was won, though the European troops were hampered by defective ammunition and Sir Hugh himself here received his fifth sunstroke. In five months he had beaten the enemy in thirteen general actions and sieges, and had captured some of the strongest forts in India. News now arrived that the rebel army under Tantia Topi and the rani of Jhansi had attacked Sindhia, whose troops had gone over to the rebels and delivered Gwalior into their hands. Sir Hugh marched against Gwalior at once, captured the Morar cantonments on the 16th of June, and carried the whole of the Gwalior positions by assault on the 19th, thus restoring his state to Sindhia within ten days of taking the field. This was the crowning stroke of the Central India campaign, and practically put an end to the Mutiny, though the work of stamping out its embers went on for many months, and was only completed with the capture and execution of Tantia Topi in April 1859.

The Indian Mutiny was in no sense a national rising. The great mass of the people in the affected districts either stood neutral, waiting with the immemorial patience of the East to accept the yoke of the conqueror, or helped the Not a national rising. British troops with food and service, in many cases also sheltering British fugitives to the best of their ability. The attempt to throw off the British yoke was confined to a few disaffected ex-rulers and their heirs, with their numerous clansmen and hangers-on, besides the badmashes and highwaymen who saw their way to profit by the removal of the British administration under which their peculiar talents found no safe outlet. The Bengal native army was their tool, which circumstances put into their hands at the psychological moment when British power seemed to be at its lowest point. But the fighting races of the Punjab saw no reason for casting in their lot with the mutineers, and the great majority of the independent princes who had nothing of which to complain, like Patiala in the Punjab, Holkar and Sindhia in central India, preserved a loyal or at least an interested friendship. The Sikhs showed their appreciation of Lawrence’s admirable administration by keeping faith with their recent conquerors, and the Gurkhas of Nepal did yeoman service for their fathers’ enemies. The lack of any central principle or common interest was shown in the divided counsels and sporadic action of the mutineers and their allies, which made them an easy prey to the solid and audacious British forces.

The chief result of the Indian Mutiny was to end the government of India by the East India company. It was felt that a system of administration which could permit such a catastrophe was no longer desirable. On the 2nd of The result of the Mutiny. August 1858 the queen signed the act which transferred the government of India to the crown. On the 1st of November Lord Canning, now viceroy of India, published the noble proclamation in which the change was announced, and a full amnesty was offered to all the rebels who had not been leaders in the revolt or were not guilty of the murder of British subjects. Even before the fall of Delhi, Canning had been adversely criticized—“Clemency Canning” he was scornfully called—for announcing his intention to discriminate between the guilt of various classes of mutineers. But a wiser view soon prevailed, and the natives of India at large gratefully accepted the queen’s proclamation as the charter of their lives and liberties.

See G. W. Forrest, History of the Indian Mutiny (1904), and Selections from State Papers (1897); T. R. E. Holmes, History of the Indian Mutiny (1898); Kaye and Malleson’s History of the Indian Mutiny (1864-1888); R. S. Rait, Life of Lord Gough (1903); Sir W. Lee-Warner, Life of Lord Dalhousie (1904); Sir H. Cunningham, Lord Canning (“Rulers of India” series), (1890); Sir Owen Tudor Burne, Clyde and Strathnairn (1895); Lord Roberts, Forty-One Years in India (1898); and Sir Evelyn Wood’s articles in The Times in the autumn of 1907.

INDIAN OCEAN, the ocean bounded N. by India and Persia; W. by Arabia and Africa, and the meridian passing southwards from Cape Agulhas; and E. by Farther India, the Sunda Islands, West and South Australia, and the meridian passing through South Cape in Tasmania. As in the case of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the southern boundary is taken at either 40° S., the line of separation from the great Southern Ocean, or, if the belt of this ocean between the two meridians named be included, at the Antarctic Circle. It attains its greatest breadth, more than 6000 m. between the south points of Africa and Australia, and becomes steadily narrower towards the north, until it is divided by the Indian peninsula into two arms, the Arabian Sea on the west and the Bay of Bengal on the east. Both branches meet the coast of Asia almost exactly on the Tropic of Cancer, but the Arabian Sea communicates with the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf by the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb and Ormuz respectively. Both of these, again, extend in a north-westerly direction to 30° N. Murray gives the total area, reckoning to 40° S. and including the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, as 17,320,550 English square miles, equivalent to 13,042,000 geographical square miles. Karstens gives the area as 48,182,413 square kilometres, or 14,001,000 geographical square miles; of these 10,842,000 square kilometres, or 3,150,000 geographical square miles, about 22% of the whole, lie north of the equator. For the area from 40° S. to the Antarctic Circle, Murray gives 9,372,600 English square miles, equivalent to 7,057,568 geographical square miles, and Karstens 24,718,000 square kilometres, equivalent to 7,182,474 geographical square miles. The Indian Ocean receives few large rivers, the chief being the Zambezi, the Shat-el-Arab, the Indus, the Ganges, the Brahmaputra and the Irawadi. Murray estimates the total land area draining to the Indian Ocean at 5,050,000 geographical square miles, almost the same as that draining to the Pacific. The annual rainfall draining from this area is estimated at 4380 cubic miles.

Relief.—Large portions of the bed still remain unexplored, but a fair knowledge of its general form has been gained from the soundings of H.M.S. “Challenger,” the German “Gazelle” Expedition, and various cable ships, and in 1898 information was greatly added to by the German “Valdivia” Expedition. A ridge, less than 2000 fathoms from the surface, extends south-eastwards from the Cape. This ridge, on which the Crozet Islands and Kerguelen are situated, is directly connected with the submarine plateau of the Antarctic. From it the depth increases north-eastwards, and the greatest depression is found in the angle between Australia and the Sunda Islands, where “Wharton deep,” below the 3000-fathom line, covers an area of nearly 50,000 sq. m. Immediately to the north of Wharton deep is the smaller “Maclear deep,” and the long narrow “Jeffreys deep” off the south of Australia completes the list of depressions below 3000 fathoms in the Indian Ocean. The 2000-fathom line approaches close to the coast except (1) in the Bay of Bengal, which it does not enter; (2) to the south-west of India along a ridge on which are the Laccadive and Maldive Islands; and (3) in the Mozambique Channel, and on a bank north and east of Madagascar, on which are the Seychelles, Mascarene Islands and other groups.

Islands.—Like the Pacific, the Indian Ocean contains more islands in the western than in the eastern half. Towards the centre, the Maldive, Chagos and Cocos groups are of characteristic coral formation, and coral reefs occur on most parts of the tropical coasts. There are many volcanic islands, as Mauritius, the Crozet Islands, and St Paul’s. The chief continental islands are Madagascar, Sokotra and Ceylon. Kerguelen, a desolate and uninhabited island near the centre of the Indian Ocean at its southern border, is noteworthy as providing a base station for Antarctic exploration.

Deposits.—The bottom of the Bay of Bengal, of the northern part of the Arabian Sea, of the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, and of the narrow coastal strips on the east and west sides of the ocean, are chiefly covered by blue and green muds. Off the African coasts there are large deposits of Glauconitic sands and muds at depths down to 1000 fathoms, and on banks where coral formation occurs there are large deposits of coral muds and sands. In the deeper parts the bed of the ocean is covered on the west and south by Globigerina ooze except for an elongated patch of red clay extending most of the distance from Sokotra to the Maldives. The red clay covers a nearly square area in the eastern part of the basin bounded on two sides by the Sunda Islands and the west coast of Australia, as well as two strips extending east and west from the southern margin of the square along the south of Australia and nearly to Madagascar. In the northern portion of the square, north and east of Wharton deep, the red clay is replaced over a large tract by Radiolarian ooze.

Temperature.—The mean temperature of the surface water is over 80° F. in all parts north of 13° S., except in the north-west of the Arabian Sea, where it is somewhat lower. South of 13° S. temperature falls uniformly and quickly to the Southern Ocean. Between the depths of 100 and 1000 fathoms temperature is high in the north-west, and in the south centre and south-west, and low in the north-east, the type of distribution remaining substantially the same. At 1500 fathoms temperature has become very uniform, ranging between 35° and 37° F., but still exhibiting the same type of distribution, though in a very degenerate form.

Salinity.—The saltest surface water is found in (a) the Arabian Sea and (b) along a belt extending from West Australia to South Africa, the highest salinity in this belt occurring at the Australian end. South of the belt salinity falls quickly as latitude increases, while to the north of it, in the monsoon region, the surface water is very fresh off the African coast and to the north-east. Little is known with certainty about the distribution of salinity in the depths, the number of trustworthy observations available being still very small. Probably the northern and north-eastern region, within the monsoon area, contains relatively fresh water down to very considerable depths.

Circulation.—North of the equator the surface circulation is under the control of the monsoons, and changes with them, the currents consisting chiefly of north-east and south-west drifts in the open sea, and induced streams following the coasts. During the northern summer the south-west monsoon, which is sufficiently strong to bring navigation practically to a standstill except for powerful steamers, sets up a strong north-easterly drift in the Arabian Sea, and the water removed from the east African coast is replaced by the upwelling of cold water from below; this is one of the best illustrations of this action extant. Along the line of the equator the Indian counter-current flows eastwards all the year round, acting as compensation to the great Equatorial current flowing westwards between the parallels of 7° and 20° S. The equatorial current, on meeting the northern extremity of Madagascar, sends a branch southwards along the east coast of that island, sometimes called the Mascarene current. When the main equatorial current reaches the African coast a minor stream is sent northwards to the source of the Indian counter-current, but the discharge is chiefly by the Mozambique current, which south of Cape Corrientes becomes the Agulhas current, one of the most powerful stream currents of the globe. On the west coast of Madagascar and on the banks of the African coast south of 30° S., reaction currents or “back-drifts” move in the opposite direction along the flanks of the Agulhas current; these back-drifts are of great importance to navigation. On clearing the land south of the Cape the waters of the Agulhas current meet those of the west wind drift of the Southern Ocean, and mingle with them in such a manner as to produce, by interdigitation, alternate strips of warm and cold water, which are met with at great distances south-west and south of the Cape. Between South Africa and Australia the waters form a part of the great west wind drift. The waters of this drift are, in general, of very low temperature, but it is remarkable that the interdigitation just mentioned continues far to the eastward, at least as far as Kerguelen. This fact is probably due partly to the actual intrusion of warm water from the Mascarene current east of Madagascar, and partly to the circumstance that the different temperatures of the waters are so compensated by their differences of salinity that they have almost precisely the same specific gravity in situ. The west wind drift sends a stream northwards along the west coast of Australia, the West Australia current, the homologue of the Benguela current in the South Atlantic. The principal feature in the circulation in the depths of the Indian Ocean is a slow movement of Antarctic water northwards along the bottom to take the place of that removed from the surface by evaporation, and by currents in the lower latitudes. Little is known beyond the bare fact that such movement does take place.

(H. N. D.)

INDIANOLA, a city and the county-seat of Warren county, Iowa, U.S.A., about 18 m. S. by E. of Des Moines. Pop. (1890) 2254; (1900) 3261; (1905) 3396; (1910) 3283. It is served by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy and the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific railways. Indianola is the seat of Simpson College (coeducational, Methodist Episcopal, 1867), with a college of liberal arts, an academy, a school of education, a school of business, a school of shorthand and typewriting, a conservatory of music, a school of oratory, a school of art and a military academy. In 1908 the college had 32 instructors and 905 students. The city lies in a rich farming region, and has a considerable trade in butter and eggs, vegetables and fruits, and in coal, lumber and live stock from the surrounding country. Indianola was laid out and was selected as the county-seat in 1849, and building began in the following year; it was incorporated as a town in 1864, and was chartered as a city of the second class in 1884.

INDIANS, NORTH AMERICAN. The name of “American Indians” for the aborigines of America had its origin in the use by Columbus, in a letter (February 1493) written soon after the discovery of the New World, of the The name “American Indians.” term Indios (i.e. natives of India) for the hitherto unknown human beings, some of whom he brought back to Europe with him. He believed, as did the people of his age in general, that the islands which he had discovered by sailing westward across the Atlantic were actually a part of India, a mistaken idea which later served, to suggest many absurd theories of the origin of the aborigines, their customs, languages, culture, &c. From Spanish the word, with its incorrect connotation, passed into French (Indien), Italian and Portuguese (Indio), German (Indianer), Dutch (Indiane), &c. When the New World came to be known as America, the natives received, in English especially, the name “American Indians,” to distinguish them from the “Indians” of south-eastern Asia and the East Indies. The appellation “Americans” was for a long time used in English to designate, not the European colonists, but the aborigines, and when, in 1891, Dr D. G. Brinton published his notable monograph on the Indians he entitled it The American Race, recalling the early employment of the term. The awkwardness of such a term as “American Indian,” both historically and linguistically, led Major J. W. Powell, the founder of the Bureau of American Ethnology, to put forward as a substitute “Amerind,” an arbitrary curtailment which had the advantage of lending itself easily to form words necessary and useful in ethnological writings, e.g. pre-Amerind, post-Amerind, pseudo-Amerind, Amerindish, Amerindize, &c. Purists have objected strenuously to “Amerind,” but the word already has a certain vogue in both English and French. Indeed, Professor A. H. Keane does not hesitate, in The World’s Peoples (London, 1908), to use “Amerinds” in lieu of “American Indians.” Other popular terms for the American Indians, which have more or less currency, are “Red race,” “Red men,” “Redskins,” the last not in such good repute as the corresponding German Rothäute, or French Peaux-rouges, which have scientific standing. The term “American Indians” covers all the aborigines of the New World past and present, so far as is known, although some European writers, especially in France, still seek to separate from the “Redskins” the Aztecs, Mayas, Peruvians, &c., and some American authorities would (anatomically at least) rank the Eskimo as distinct from the Indian proper. When the name “Indian” came to be used by the European colonists and their descendants, they did not confine it to “wild men,” but applied it to many things that were wild, strange, non-European in the new environment (see Journ. Amer. Folk-Lore, 1902, pp. 107-116; Handbook of Amer. Inds., 1907, pt. i. pp. 605-607). Thus more than one hundred popular names of plants in use in American English (e.g. “Indian corn,” “Indian pink,” &c.) contain references to the Indian in this way; also many other things, such as “Indian file,” “Indian ladder,” “Indian gift,” “Indian pudding,” “Indian summer.” The Canadian-French, who termed the Indian sauvage (i.e. “savage”), remembered him linguistically in botte sauvage (moccasin), traîne sauvage (toboggan). The term “Siwash,” in use in the Chinook jargon of the North Pacific coast, and also in the English of that region, for “Indian” is merely a corruption of this Canadian-French appellation. In the literature relating to the Pacific coast there is mention even of “Siwash Indians.” Throughout Canada and the United States the term “Indian” occurs in hundreds of place-names of all sorts (“Indian River,” “Indian Head,” “Indian Bay,” “Indian Hill,” and the like). There are besides these Indiana and its capital Indianapolis. In Newfoundland “Red Indian,” as the special term for the Beothuks, forms part of a number of place-names. Pope’s characterization of the American aborigine,

“Lo! the poor Indian, whose untutor’d mind Sees God in clouds, or hears Him in the wind,”

is responsible for the creation in the mind of the people of a “Mr Lo,” who figures in newspaper lore, cartoons, &c. The reputations, deserved and undeserved, of certain Indian tribes north of Mexico have been such that their names have passed into English or into the languages of other civilized nations of Europe as synonyms for “ruffian,” “thug,” “rowdy,” &c. Recently “les Apaches” have been the terror of certain districts of Paris, as were the “Mohocks” (Mohawks) for certain parts of London toward the close of the 18th century.

The North American Indians have been the subject of numerous popular fallacies, some of which have gained world-wide currency. Here belongs a mass of pseudo-scientific and thoroughly unscientific literature embodying absurd and extravagant Popular fallacies. theories and speculations as to the origin of the aborigines and their “civilizations” which derive them (in most extraordinary ways sometimes), in recent or in remote antiquity, from all regions of the Old World—Egypt and Carthage, Phoenicia and Canaan, Asia Minor and the Caucasus, Assyria and Babylonia, Persia and India, Central Asia and Siberia, China and Tibet, Korea, Japan, the East Indies, Polynesia, Greece and ancient Celtic Europe and even medieval Ireland and Wales. Favourite theories of this sort have made the North American aborigines the descendants of refugees from sunken Atlantis, Tatar warriors, Malayo-Polynesian sea-farers, Hittite immigrants from Syria, the “Lost Ten Tribes of Israel,” &c., or attributed their social, religious and political ideas and institutions to the advent of stray junks from Japan, Buddhist votaries from south-eastern Asia, missionaries from early Christian Europe, Norse vikings, Basque fishermen and the like.

Particularly interesting are the theories of “Welsh (or white) Indians” and the “Lost Ten Tribes.” The myth of the “Welsh Indians,” reputed to be the descendants of a colony founded about A.D. 1170 by Prince Madoc (well known from Southey’s poem), has been studied by James Mooney (Amer. Anthrop. iv., 1891, 393-394), who traces its development from statements in an article in The Turkish Spy, published in London about 1730. At first these “Welsh Indians,” who are subsequently described as speaking Welsh, possessing Welsh Bibles, beads, crucifixes, &c., are placed near the Atlantic coast and identified with the Tuscaroras, an Iroquoian tribe, but by 1776 they had retreated inland to the banks of the Missouri above St Louis. A few years later they were far up the Red river, continuing, as time went on, to recede farther and farther westward, being identified successively with the Mandans, in whose language Catlin thought he detected a Welsh element, the Moqui, a Pueblos tribe of north-eastern Arizona, and the Modocs (here the name was believed to re-echo Madoc) of south-western Oregon, until at last they vanished over the waters of the Pacific Ocean. The theory that the American Indians were the “Lost Ten Tribes of Israel” has not yet entirely disappeared from ethnological literature. Many of the identities and resemblances in ideas, customs and institutions between the American Indians and the ancient Hebrews, half-knowledge or distorted views of which formed the basis of the theory, are discussed, and their real significance pointed out by Colonel Garrick Mallery in his valuable address on “Israelite and Indian: A Parallel in Planes of Culture” (Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci. vol. xxxviii., 1889, pp. 287-331). The whole subject has been discussed by Professor H. W. Henshaw in his “Popular Fallacies respecting the Indians” (Amer. Anthrop. vol. vii. n.s., 1905, pp. 104-113).

Of ways of classifying the races of mankind and their subdivisions the number is great, but that which measures them by their speech is both ancient and convenient. The multiplicity of languages among the American Indians Linguistic stocks. was one of the first things that struck the earliest investigators of a scientific turn of mind, no less than the missionaries who preceded them. The Abbé Hervas, the first serious student of the primitive tongues of the New World, from the classificatory point of view, noted this multiplicity of languages in his Catalogo delle lingue conosciute e notizia della loro affinità e diversità (Cesena, 1784); and after him Balbi, Adelung and others. About the same time in America Thomas Jefferson, who besides being a statesman was also a considerable naturalist (see Amer. Anthrop. ix. n.s., 1907, 499-509), was impressed by the same fact, and in his Notes on the State of Virginia observed that for one “radical language” in Asia there would be found probably twenty in America. Jefferson himself collected and arranged (the MSS. were afterwards lost) the vocabularies of about fifty Indian languages and dialects, and so deserves rank among the forerunners of the modern American school of comparative philologists. After Jefferson came Albert Gallatin, who had been his secretary of the treasury, as a student of American Indian languages in the larger sense. He had also himself collected a number of Indian vocabularies. Gallatin’s work is embodied in the well-known “Synopsis of the Indian Tribes within the United States East of the Rocky Mountains, and in the British and Russian Possessions in North America,” published in the Transactions and Collections of the American Antiquarian Society (ii. 1-422) for 1836. In this, really the first attempt in America to classify on a linguistic basis the chief Indian tribes of the better-known regions of North America, Gallatin enumerated the following twenty-nine separate divisions: Adaize, Algonkin-Lenape, Athapascas, Atnas, Attacapas, Blackfeet, Caddoes, Catawbas, Chahtas, Cherokees, Chetimachas, Chinooks, Eskimaux, Fall Indians, Iroquois, Kinai, Koulischen, Muskhogee, Natches, Pawnees, Queen Charlotte’s Island, Salish, Salmon River (Friendly Village), Shoshonees, Sioux, Straits of Fuca, Utchees, Wakash, Woccons. These do not all represent distinct linguistic stocks, as may be seen by comparison with the list given below; such peoples as the Caddo and Pawnee are now known to belong together, the Blackfeet are Algonkian, the Catawba Siouan, the Adaize Caddoan, the Natchez Muskogian, &c. But the monograph is a very good first attempt at classifying North American Indian languages.

Gallatin’s coloured map of the distribution of the Indian tribes in question is also a pioneer piece of work. In 1840 George Bancroft, in the third volume of his History of the Colonization of the United States, discussed the Indian tribes east of the Mississippi, listing the following eight families: Algonquin, Catawba, Cherokee, Huron-Iroquois, Mobilian (Choctaw and Muskhogee), Natchez, Sioux or Dahcota, Uchee. He gives also a linguistic map, modified somewhat from that of Gallatin. The next work of great importance in American comparative philology is Horatio Hale’s monograph forming the sixth volume (Phila., 1846), Ethnography and Philology, of the publications of the “United States Exploring Expedition, during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1842, under the Command of Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy,” which added much to our knowledge of the languages of the Indians of the Pacific coast regions. Two years later Gallatin published in the second volume of the Transactions of the American Ethnological Society (New York) a monograph entitled “Hale’s Indians of North-west America, and Vocabularies of North America,” in which he recognized the following additional groups: Arrapahoes, Jakon, Kalapuya, Kitunaha, Lutuami, Palainih, Sahaptin, Saste, Waiilatpu. In 1853 he contributed a brief paper to the third volume of Schoolcraft’s Information Respecting the History, Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the United States, adding to the “families” already recognized by him the following: Cumanches, Gros Ventres, Kaskaias, Kiaways, Natchitoches, Towiacks, Ugaljachmutzi. Some modifications in the original list were also made. During the period 1853-1877 many contributions to the classification of the Indian languages of North America, those of the west and the north-west in particular, were made by Gibbs, Latham, Turner, Buschmann, Hayden, Dall, Powers, Powell and Gatschet. The next important step, and the most scientific, was taken by Major J. W. Powell, who contributed to the Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1885-1886 (Washington, 1891) his classic monograph (pp. 1-142) on “Indian Linguistic Families of America North of Mexico.” In 1891 also appeared Dr D. G. Brinton’s The American Race: A Linguistic Classification and Ethnographic Description of the Native Tribes of North and South America (New York, p. 392). With these two works the adoption of language as the means of distinction and classification of the American aborigines north of Mexico for scientific purposes became fixed. Powell, using the vocabulary as the test of relationship or difference, enumerated, in the area considered, 58 separate linguistic stocks, or families of speech, each “as distinct from one another in their vocabularies and apparently in their origin as from the Aryan or the Scythian families” (p. 26).

The 58 distinct linguistic stocks of American Indians north of Mexico, recognized by Powell, were as follows: (1) Adaizan; (2) Algonquian; (3) Athapascan; (4) Attacapan; (5) Beothukan; (6) Caddoan; (7) Chimakuan; (8) Chimarikan; (9) Chimmesyan; (10) Chinookan; (11) Chitimachan; (12) Chumashan; (13) Coahuiltecan; (14) Copehan; (15) Costanoan; (16) Eskimauan; (17) Esselenian; (18) Iroquoian; (19) Kalapooian; (20) Karankawan; (21) Keresan; (22) Kiowan; (23) Kitunahan; (24) Koluschan; (25) Kulanapan; (26) Kusan; (27) Lutuamian; (28) Mariposan; (29) Moquelumnan; (30) Muskhogean; (31) Natchesan; (32) Palaihnihan; (33) Piman; (34) Pujunan; (35) Quoratean; (36) Salinan; (37) Salishan; (38) Sastean; (39) Shahaptian; (40) Shoshonean; (41) Siouan; (42) Skittagetan; (43) Takilman; (44) Tañoan; (45) Timuquanan; (46) Tonikan; (47) Tonkawan; (48) Uchean; (49) Waiilatpuan; (50) Wakashan; (51) Washoan; (52) Weitspekan; (53) Wishoskan; (54) Yakonan; (55) Yanan; (56) Yukian; (57) Yuman; (58) Zuñian.

This has been the working-list of students of American Indian languages, but since its appearance the scientific investigations of Boas, Gatschet, Dorsey, Fletcher, Mooney, Hewitt, Hale, Morice, Henshaw, Hodge, Matthews, Kroeber, Dixon, Goddard, Swanton and others have added much to our knowledge, and not a few serious modifications of Powell’s classification have resulted. With Powell’s monograph was published a coloured map showing the distribution of all the linguistic stocks of Indians north of Mexico. Of this a revised edition accompanies the Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico, published by the Bureau of American Ethnology in 1907-1910, now the standard book of reference on the subject. The chief modifications made in Powell’s list are as follows: The temporary presence in a portion of south-west Florida of a new stock, the Arawakan, is now proved. The Adaizan language has been shown to belong to the Caddoan family; the Natchez to the Muskogian; the Palaihnian to the Shastan; the Piman to the Shoshonian. The nomenclature of Powell’s classification has never been completely satisfactory to American philologists, and a movement is now well under way (see Amer. Anthrop. vii. n.s., 1905, 579-593) to improve it. In the present article the writer has adopted some of the suggestions made by a committee of the American Anthropological Society in 1907, covering several of the points in question.

In the light of the most recent and authoritative researches and investigations the linguistic stocks of American aborigines north of Mexico, past and present, the areas occupied, earliest homes (or original habitats), number of tribes, subdivisions, &c., and population, may be given as follows:—

Stock. Area. Earliest Home. Tribes, &c. Population.

1. Algonkian. Most of N. and E. North America, between lat. 35° and 55°; centred in the region of the Great Lakes and Hudson’s Bay. N. of the St Lawrence and E. of Lake Ontario (Brinton); N.W. of the Great Lakes (Thomas). Some 50-60, with many minor groups. About 90,000, of which some 50,000 in Canada.

2. Arawakan. Within the territory of the Calusas in S.W. Florida. Central South America. Small colony from Cuba. Extinct about end of 16th century.

3. Atakapan. Louisiana and N.E. Texas. In part of S.W. or N.E. Texas. 2. Practically extinct; in 1885 4 individuals living in Louisiana, and 5 in Texas.

4. Athabaskan. Interior of Alaska and Canada; W. of Hudson’s Bay and N. of the Algonkian; also represented in Oregon, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and northern Mexico. Interior of Alaska or N.W. Canada. Some 50, with numerous minor groups. About 54,000, of which some 20,000 in Canada.

5. Beothukan. Newfoundland. Some part of Newfoundland or Labrador. Local settlements only. Extinct; last representatives died in 1829.

6. Caddoan. Country between the Arkansas and Colorado rivers in Louisiana, Texas, &c., particularly on the Red River and its affluents; later also in Kansas, Nebraska Dakota, and Oklahoma On the lower Red River, or, perhaps, somewhere to the S.W. Some 12-15. About 2000.

7. Chemakuan. On the N.W. shore of Puget Sound, Washington; also on Pacific coast near Cape Flattery. Some part of N.W. Washington. 2. About 200.

8. Chimarikan. In N. California, on Trinity river, N.W. of the Copehan. Somewhere in N. California. 1. Practically extinct; in 1903 only nine individuals reported living.

9. Chinookan. On the lower Columbia river, from the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean; on the coast, N. to Shoalwater Bay and S. to Tillamook Head, in Washington and Oregon. N. of the Columbia, in W. Washington. Some 10 or 12 with numerous villages. About 300.

10. Chitimachan. Part of S.E. Louisiana. Region of Grand Lake and river, Louisiana. 1. Nearly extinct; in 1881 only 50 individuals surviving.

11. Chumashan. In S.W. California, S. of the Salinan and Mariposan; in the basins of the Sta Maria, Sta Inez, lower Sta Clara,&c., on the coast, and the northern Sta. Barbara Islands. Somewhere in S.W. California. 7 or more dialects, with many settle ments. Nearly extinct; only 15-20 individuals still living.

12. Copehan (Wintun). In central N. California, W. of the Pujunan; W. of the Coast range, from San Pablo and Suisun Bays N. to Mount Shasta. Somewhere in N. California. 2 chief divisions, with many small settlements. About 130 at various villages, and as many on Round Valley Reservation.

13. Costanoan. In the coast region of central California, N. of the Salinan; from about San Fransisco S. to Point Sur and Big Panoche Creek, and from the Pacific Ocean to the San Joaquin river. Somewhere in central California. No true tribes, but 15-20 settlements. Nearly extinct; only 25-30 individuals still living.

14. Eskimoan. Greenland and some of the Arctic islands, the whole northern coast N. of the Algonkian and Athabaskan, from the straits of Belle Isle to the end of the Aleutian Islands; also in extreme N.E. Asia W. to the Anadyr river; in E. North America in earlier times possibly considerably farther south. Interior of Alaska (Rink); in the region W. of Hudson’s Bay (Boas); preferably the latter. 9 well-marked groups, with 60-70 “settlements,” &c. About 28,000, of which there are in Greenland 11,000 Alaska 13,000, Canada 4500, and Asia 1200.

15. Esselenian. On the coast of W. California, S. of Monterey, N. of the Salinan. Somewhere in W. or central California. Many small settlements. Extinct; last speaker of language died about 1890.

16. Haidan (Skittagetan). The Queen Charlotte Islands, off the N.W. coast of British Columbia, and part of the Prince of Wales Archipelago, Alaska. Interior of Alaska or N.W. Canada. 2 dialects; about 25 chief “towns,” and many minor settlements. About 900, of which 300 are in Alaska.

17. Iroquoian. The region about Lakes Erie and Ontario (Ontario, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, &c.), and on both banks of the St Lawrence, on the N. to beyond the Saguenay, on the S. to Gaspé; also represented in the S.E. United States by the Toscarora, Cherokee, &c. (now chiefly in Oklahoma). Somewhere between the lower St Lawrence and Hudson’s Bay (Brinton, Hale); in S. Ohio and Kentucky (Boyle, Thomas). Some 15 chief tribes with many minor subdivisions. About 40,000, of which 10,000 are in Canada; of those in the United States 28,000 are Cherokee.

18. Kalapuyan. In N.W. Oregon in the valley of the Willamette, above the Falls. Somewhere in N.W. Oregon. About 15-18, with minor divisions. Only some 140 individuals still living.

19. Karankawan. On the Texas coast, from Galveston to Padre Island. Somewhere in S. Texas. 5-6, with minor divisions. Extinct probably in 1858; a few survived later, possibly, in Mexico.

20. Keresan. In N. central New Mexico, on the Rio Grande and its tributaries, the Jemez, San José, &c. Somewhere in the New Mexico-Arizona region. 17 “villages” (pueblos); earlier more. 3990, in 6 pueblos (some 150 at Isleta).

21. Kiowan. On the upper Arkansas and Canadian rivers, in Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, &c.; formerly on the head-waters of the Platte, and still earlier on the upper Yellowstone and Missouri, in S.W. Montana. At the foot of the Rocky Mountains in S.W. Montana. 1. 1219 in Oklahoma.

22. Kitunahan. In S.E. British Columbia, N. Idaho, and part of N.W. Montana. Somewhere E. of the Rocky Mountains in Montana or Alberta. 2 chief divisions and 3 others. About 1100; half in Canada and half in the United States.

23. Koluschan (Tlingit). On the coast and adjacent islands of S. Alaska, from 55° to 60° N. lat.; also some in Canada. Somewhere in the interior of Alaska or N.W. Canada. Some 12-15. About 2000.

24. Kulanapan (Pomo). On the coast in N.W. California (Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties), W. of the Yukian. Somewhere in N.W. California. About 30 local divisions, &c.; no true tribes. About 1000.

25. Kusan. On the coast of central Oregon, on Coos Bay and Coos and Coquille rivers, S. of the Yakonan; now mostly on Siletz Reservation. Somewhere inland from Coos Bay, Oregon. 4, earlier more. About 50.

26. Lutuamian (Klamath). In the region of the Klamath and Tule lakes, Lost and Sprague rivers, &c., in Oregon (chiefly) and N.E. California; now on Klamath Reservation, Oregon, with a few also in Oklahoma. In S. Oregon, N. of the Klamath lakes. 2, with local subdivisions. 1034; of these 755 Klamath, and 279 Modoc (56 in Oklahoma).

27. Mariposan (Yokuts). In S. central California, in the valley of the San Joaquin, on the Tule, Kaweah, King’s rivers, &c.; E. of the Salinan, S. of the Moquelumnan. Somewhere in central California. 30-40 groups with special dialects. About 150, at Tule river reservation, &c.

28. Moquelumnan (Miwok). In central California, in three sections: the main area on the W. slope of the Sierras, from the Cosumnes river on the N. to the Fresno on the S.; a second on the N. shore of San Francisco Bay, and a third (small) S. of Clear Lake on the head-waters of Putah Creek. Somewhere in central California. 7 dialects, no true tribes; about 20 local groups with numerous minor ones. Several hundred; much scattered.

29. Muskogian (Muskhogean). In the Gulf States, E. of the Mississippi, most of Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia, part of Tennessee, S. Carolina, Florida and Louisiana; now mostly in Oklahoma. Somewhere W. of the lower Mississippi. About 12, with many minor divisions. About 40,000; of these 38,000 in Oklahoma, 1000 in Mississippi, 350 in Florida, and a few in Louisiana.

30. Pakawan (Coahuiltecan). On both banks of the Rio Grande in Texas and Mexico, from its mouth to beyond Laredo; at one time possibly E. to Antonio, and W. to the Sierra Madre. Some part of N.E. Mexico. 20-25, some very small. Practically extinct; in 1886 about 30 individuals still living, mostly on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande.

31. Pujunan (Maidu). In N.E. California, E. of the Sacramento river, between the Shastan and Moquelumnan. N.E. California. No true tribes; several larger and very many smaller local divisions, “villages,” &c. About 250 full-bloods.

32. Quoratean (Karok). In extreme N.W. California, on the Klamath river, &c.; W. of the Shastan. Somewhere in N. California. Many “villages,” &c. In 1889 some 600; much reduced since; possibly 300.

33. Sahaptian. In the region of the Columbia and its tributaries, in parts of Washington, Idaho and Oregon; between lat. 44° and 47°, and from the Cascades to the Bitter Root Mountains. Somewhere in the region of the Columbia, or farther N. 5-7. About 4200.

34. Salinan. On the Pacific coast of S.W. California, from above S. Antonio, to below S. Louis Obispo; W. of the Mariposan. Somewhere in S.W. California. 2 or 3 larger divisions; no true tribes. Practically extinct; in 1884 only 10-12 individuals living.

35. Salishan. A large part of S. British Columbia and Washington, with parts of Idaho and Montana; also part of Vancouver Island, and outliers in N. British Columbia (Bilqula), and S.W. Oregon. Central or N. British Columbia. Some 60-65, of which a number are merely local divisions. About 15,000 in Canada, and some 6300 in the United States.

36. Shastan. In N. California and S. Oregon, in the basins of the Pit and Klamath rivers, on Rogue river and to beyond the Siskiyou Mountains; S. of the Lutuamian. In N. California or Oregon. 6 or more linguistic divisions. Less than 40 Shasta full-bloods; some 1200 Achomawi.

37. Shoshonian. In the W. part of the United States; most of the country between lat. 35° and 45° and long. 105° and 120°, with extensions N., S., and S.E. outside this area; represented also in California, and in Mexico by the Piman, Sonoran and Nahuatlan tribes. Foot-hills and plains E. of the Rocky Mountains in N.W. United States or Canada, but residence in Plateau region long-continued. Some 12-15 in the United States; many more in Mexico, ancient and modern. In the United States, some 24,000.

38. Siouan. In the basin of the Missouri and the upper Mississippi; from about N. lat. 33° to 53° and, at the broadest, from 89° to 110° W. long.; also represented in Wisconsin (Winnebago), Louisiana, the Carolinas, and Virginia (formerly). In the Carolina-Virginia region. Some 20 large and many minor ones. About 38,000; of which some 1400 in Canada.

39. Takelman. In S.W. Oregon, in the middle valley of Rogue river, on the upper Rogue, and to about the California line or beyond. In some part of S. Oregon. 2. Practically extinct; perhaps 6 speakers of the language alive.

40. Tanoan. In New Mexico, on the Rio Grande, &c., from lat. 33° to 36°; also a settlement with the Moqui in N.E. Arizona, and another on the Rio Grande at the boundary line, partly in Mexico. Some part of New Mexico. Some 14-15 pueblos. About 4200 in 12 pueblos.

41. Timuquan. In Florida, from the N. border and the Ocilla river to Lake Okeechobee, perhaps farther N. and S. Some part of Florida. Some 60 or more settlements. Extinct in 18th century.

42. Tonikan. In part of E. Louisiana and part of Mississippi; in Avoyelles parish, La., &c. Somewhere in the Louisiana-Mississippi region. 3. Practically extinct; in 1886 some 25 individuals living at Marksville, La.

43. Tonkawan. In S.E. Texas, N.W. of the Karankawan; remnants now in Oklahoma. Somewhere in S. or W. Texas. 1. Nearly extinct; in 1884 only 78 individuals living; in 1905 but 47, with Ponkas, in Oklahoma.

44. Tsimshian (Chimmesyan). In N.W. British Columbia, on the Nass and Skeena rivers, and the adjacent islands and coast S. to Millbank Sound; also (since 1887) on Annette Island, Alaska. On the headwaters of the Skeena river. 3 main and several minor divisions. About 3200 in Canada, and 950 in Alaska.

45. Wailatpuan. A western section (Molala) in the Cascade region between Mounts Hood and Scott, in Washington and Oregon; an eastern (Cayuse) on the headwaters of the Wallawalla, Umatilla and Grande Ronde rivers. In Oregon, S. of the Columbia river. 2. Language practically extinct; 405 Cayuse (in 1888 only 6 spoke their mother tongue) are still living; in 1881 about 20 Molalas.

46. Wakashan (Kwakiutl-Nootka). Most of Vancouver Island (except some 2⁄3 of the E. coast) and most of the coast of British Columbia from Gardner channel to Cape Mudge; also part of extreme N.W. Washington. Somewhere in the interior of British Columbia. 3 main divisions, with more than 50 “tribes.” 4765, of which 435 are in the United States.

47. Washoan. In E. central California and the adjoining part of Nevada, in the region of Lake Tahoe and the lower Carson valley. In N.W. Nevada. 1. About 200, in the region of Carson, Reno, &c.

48. Weitspekan (Yurok). In N.W. California, W. of the Quoratean. In N. California or S. Oregon. 6 divisions; no true tribes. A few hundreds; in 1870 estimated at 2000 or more.

49. Wishoskan (Wiyot). In N.W. California, in the coast region, S. of the Weitspekan. In N. California. 3-5 divisions; no true tribes. Nearly extinct.

50. Yakonan. In W. Oregon, in the coast region and on the rivers from the Yaquina to the Umpqua. W. central Oregon. 4 chief divisions, with numerous villages. About 300, on the Siletz Reservation

51. Yanan. In central N. California in the region of Round Mountain. &c., S. of the Shastan. Somewhere farther E. 1. Practically extinct; in 1884 but 35 individuals living.

52. Yuchian. In E. Georgia, on the Savannah river from above Augusta down to the Ogeechee, and also on Chatahoochee river; remnants now in Oklahoma. Somewhere E. of the Chatahoochee. 1. About 500, with Creeks in Oklahoma.

53. Yukian. In N.W. California, E. of the Copehan, with a N. and a S. section; in the Round Valley region. N. or central California. 5 divisions; no true tribes. About 250.

54. Yuman. In the extreme S.W. of the United States (lower Colorado and Gila valley), part of California, most of Lower California, and a small part of Mexico. N.W. Arizona. 9-10. In the United States about 4800.

55. Zuñian. In N.W. New Mexico, on the Zuñi river. Some part of the New Mexico-Arizona region. 1. 1500.

Of these 55 different linguistic stocks 5 (Arawakan, Beothukan, Esselenian, Karankawan and Timuquan) are completely extinct, the Arawakan, of course, in North America only; 13 (Atakapan, Chimarikan, Chitimachan, Chumashan, Costanoan, Kusan, Pakawan, Salinan, Takelman, Tonikan, Tonkawan, Wishoskan, Yakonan) practically extinct; while the speakers of a few other languages or the survivors of the people once speaking them (e.g. Chemakuan, Chinookan, Copehan, Kalapuyan, Mariposan, Washoan, Yukian), number about 200 or 300, in some cases fewer. Of the Wailatpuans, although some individuals belonging to the stock are still living, the language itself is practically extinct. The distribution of the various stocks reveals some interesting facts. Among these are the stretch of the Eskimoan along the whole Arctic coast and its extension into Asia; the immense areas occupied by the Athabaskan and the Algonkian, and (less notably) the Shoshonian and the Siouan; the existence of few stocks on the Atlantic slope (from Labrador to Florida, east of the Mississippi, only 8 are represented); the great multiplicity of stocks in the Pacific coast region, particularly in Oregon and California; the extension of the Shoshonian, Yuman and Athabaskan southward into Mexico, the Shoshonian in ancient, the Athabaskan in modern times; the existence of an Arawakan colony in south-western Florida, a 16th-century representative in North America of a South American linguistic stock. Some stocks, e.g. Atakapan, Beothukan, Chemakuan, Chimarikan, Chitimachan, Kiowan, Kitunahan, Lutuamian, Takelman, Tonkawan, Wailatpuan, Yanan, Yuchian, Zuñi, &c., were not split up into innumerable dialects, possessing at most but two, three or four, usually fewer. Of the larger stocks, the Athabaskan, Algonkian, Shoshonian, Siouan, Iroquoian, Salishan, &c., possess many dialects often mutually unintelligible. In marked contrast with this is the case of the Eskimoan stock, where, in spite of the great distance over which it has extended, dialect variations are at a minimum, and the people “have retained their language in all its minor features for centuries” (Boas). As to the reason for the abundance of linguistic stocks in the region of the Pacific (from Alaska to Lower California, west of long. 115°, there are 37: Eskimoan, Koluschan, Athabaskan, Haidan, Tsimshian, Wakashan, Salishan, Kitunahan, Chimakuan, Chinookan, Sahaptian, Wailatpuan, Shoshonian, Kalapuyan, Yakonan, Kusan, Takelman, Lutuamian, Quoratean, Weitspekan, Wishoskan, Shastan, Yanan, Chimarikan, Yukian, Copehan, Pujunan, Washoan, Kulanapan, Moquelumnan, Mariposan, Costanoan, Esselenian, Salinan, Chumashan, Yuman) there has been much discussion. Of these no fewer than 18 are confined practically to the limits of the present state of California. Dialects of Athabaskan, Shoshonian and Yuman also occur within the Californian areas, thus making, in all, representatives of 21 linguistic stocks in a portion of the continent measuring less than 156,000 sq. m. In explanation of this great diversity of speech several theories have been put forward. One is to the effect that here, as in the region of the Caucasus in the Old World, the multiplicity of languages is due to the fact that tribe after tribe has been driven into the mountain valleys, &c., by the pressure of stronger and more aggressive peoples, who were setting forth on careers of migration and conquest. Another view, advocated by Horatio Hale in 1886 (Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci.; also Proc. Canad. Inst., Toronto, 1888), is that this great diversity of human speech is due to the language-making instinct of children, being the result of “its exercise by young children accidentally isolated from the teachings and influence of grown companions.” A pair of young human beings, separating thus from the parent tribe and starting social life in a new environment by themselves, would, according to Mr Hale, soon produce a new dialect or a new language. This theory was looked upon with favour by Romanes, Brinton, and other psychologists and ethnologists. Dr R. B. Dixon (Congr. intern. des. Amér., Quebec, 1906, pp. 255-263), discussing some aspects of this question, concludes “that the great linguistic and considerable cultural complexity of this whole California-Oregon region is due to progressive differentiation rather than to the crowding into this restricted area of remnants of originally discrete stocks.” How far two dialects of one stock can go in the way of such differentiation without becoming absolutely distinct is illustrated by the Achomawi branches of the Shastan family of speech, which Dr Dixon has very carefully investigated.

The test of vocabulary is not the only means by which the languages of the North American aborigines might be classified. There are peculiarities of phonetics, morphology, grammar, sentence-structure, &c., which suggest groupings of the linguistic stocks independent of their lexical content. Some languages are harsh and consonantal (e.g. the Kootenay and others of the North Pacific region), some melodious and vocalic, as are certain of the tongues of California and the south-eastern United States. Some employ reduplication with great frequency, like certain Shoshonian dialects; others, like Kootenay, but rarely. A few, like the Chinook, are exceedingly onomatopoeic. Some, like the northern languages of California, have no proper plural forms. Of the Californian languages the Pomo alone distinguishes gender in the pronoun, a feature common to other languages no farther off than Oregon. The high development and syntactical use of demonstratives which characterize the Kwakiutl are not found among the Californian tongues. A few languages, like the Chinook and the Tonika, possess real grammatical gender. Some languages are essentially prefix, others essentially suffix tongues; while yet others possess both prefixes and suffixes, or even infixes as well. In some languages vocalic changes, in others consonantal, have grammatical or semantic meaning. In certain languages tense, mood and voice are rather weakly developed. In some languages syntactical cases occur (e.g. in certain Californian tongues), while in many others they are quite unknown. Altogether the most recent investigations have revealed a much greater variety in morphological and in grammatical processes than was commonly believed to exist, so that the general statement that the American Indian tongues are all clearly and distinctly of the “incorporating” and “polysynthetic” types needs considerable modification. Using criteria of phonetics, morphology, grammar, &c., some of the best authorities have been able to suggest certain groups of North American Indian languages exhibiting peculiarities justifying the assumption of relationship together. Thus Dr Franz Boas (Mem. Intern. Congr. Anthrop., 1893, pp. 339-346, and Ann. Archaeol. Rep. Ontario, 1905, pp. 88-106) has grouped the linguistic stocks of the North Pacific coast region as follows: (1) Tlingit (Koluschan) and Haida; (2) Tsimshian; (3) Wakashan (Kwakiutl-Nootka), Salish, Chemakum; (4) Chinook. In the same region the present writer has suggested a possible relationship of the Kootenay with Shoshonian. In the Californian area Dr R. B. Dixon and Dr A. L. Kroeber have made out these probable groups among the numerous language stocks of that part of the United States: (1) Chumashan and Salinan; (2) Yurok (Weitspekan), Wishoskan, Athabaskan, Karok (Quoratean), Chimarikan; (3) Maidu (Pujunan), Lutuamian, Wintun (Copehan), Yukian, Pomo (Kulanapan), Costanoan, Esselenian, Yokuts (Mariposan), Shoshonian, Shastan, Moquelumnan and possibly Washoan; (4) Yanan; (5) Yuman. Suggestions of even larger groups than any of these have also been made. It may be that, judged by certain criteria, the Kootenay, Shoshonian, Iroquoian and Siouan may belong together, but this is merely tentative. It is also possible, from the consideration of morphological peculiarities, that some if not all of the languages of the so-called “Palaeo-Asiatic” peoples of Siberia, as Boas has suggested (Science, vol. xxiii., n.s., 1906, p. 644), may be included within the American group of linguistic stocks. Indeed Sternberg (Intern. Amer.-Kongr. xiv., Stuttgart, 1904, pp. 137-140) has undertaken to show the relationship morphologically of one of these languages, the Giliak (of the island of Saghalin and the region about the mouth of the Amur), to the American tongues, and its divergence from the “Ural-Altaic” family of speech. Here, however, more detailed investigations are needed to settle the question.

At one time the opinion was widely prevalent that primitive languages changed very rapidly, sometimes even within a generation, and the American Indian tongues were rather freely used as typical examples of such extreme General character of Indian languages. variation. The error of this view is now admitted everywhere, and for the speech of the New World aborigines Dr Franz Boas states (Hndb. Amer. Ind. pt. i., 1907, p. 759): “There is, however, no historical proof of the change of any Indian language since the time of the discovery comparable with that of the language of England between the 10th and 13th centuries.” Another statement that has obtained currency, appearing even in otherwise reputable quarters sometimes, is to the effect that some of the vocabularies of American Indian languages consist of but a few hundred words, one being indeed so scanty that its speakers could not converse by night, since darkness prevented resort to the use of gesture. This is absolutely contrary to fact, for the vocabularies of the languages of the American Indians are rich, and, according to the best authority on the subject, “it is certain that in every one there are a couple of thousand of stem words and many thousand words, as that term is defined in English dictionaries” (Boas). The number of words in the vocabulary of the individual Indian is also much greater than is generally thought to be the case. It was long customary, even in “scientific” circles, to deny to American Indian tongues the possession of abstract terms, but here again the authority of the best recent investigators is conclusive, for “the power to form abstract ideas is, nevertheless, not lacking, and the development of abstract thought would find in every one of the languages a ready means of expression” (Boas). In this connexion, however, it should be remembered that, in general, the languages of the American aborigines “are not so well adapted to generalized statements as to lively descriptions.” The holophrastic terms characteristic of so many American Indian languages “are not due to a lack of power to classify, but are rather expressions of form of culture, single terms being intended for those ideas of prime importance to the people” (Boas). This consideration of American primitive tongues in their relation to culture-types opens up a comparatively new field of research, and one of much evolutional significance.

As a result of the most recent and authoritative philological investigations, the following may be cited as some of the chief characteristics of many, and in some cases, of most of the languages of the aborigines north of Mexico.

1. Tendency to express ideas with great graphic detail as to place, form, &c.

2. “Polysynthesis,” a device making possible, by the use of modifications of stems and radicals and the employment of prefixes, suffixes, and sometimes infixes, &c., the expression of a large number of special ideas. By such methods of composition (to cite two examples from Boas) the Eskimo can say at one breath, so to speak, “He only orders him to go and see,” and the Tsimshian, “He went with him upward in the dark and came against an obstacle.” The Eskimo Takusariartorumagaluarnerpâ? (“Do you think he really intends to go to look after it?”) is made up from the following elements: Takusar(pâ), “he looks after it”; iartor (poq), “he goes to”; uma (voq), “he intends to”; (g) aluar (poq), “he does so, but”; nerpoq, “do you think he.” The Cree “word” “kekawewechetushekamikowanowow” (“may it,” i.e. the grace of Jesus Christ, “remain with you”) is resolvable into: Kelawow (here split into ke at the beginning and -owow as terminal), “you” (pl.); ka = sign of futurity (first and second persons); we = an optative particle; weche = “with”; tusheka = verbal radical, “remain”; mik = pronominal particle showing that the subject of the verb is in the third person and the object in the second, “it-you”; owan = verbal possessive particle, indicating that the subject of the verb is something inanimate belonging to the animate third person, “his-it.” The Carrier (Athabaskan) lekœnahweshœndœthœnœzkrok, “I usually recommence to walk to and fro on all fours while singing,” which Morice calls “a simple word,” is built up from the following elements: le = “prefix expressing reciprocity, which, when in connexion with a verb of locomotion, indicates that the movement is executed between two certain points without giving prominence to either”; kœ = particle denoting direction toward these points; na = “iterative particle, suggesting that the action is repeated”; hwe = particle referring to the action as being in its incipient stage; shœn = “song” (when incorporated in a verb it “indicates that singing accompanies the action expressed by the verbal root”); dœ = “a particle called for by shœn, said particle always entering into the composition of verbs denoting reference to vocal sounds”; thœ = the secondary radical of the uncomposite verb thîzkret inflected from thi for the sake of euphony with nœz; nœz = “the pronominal element of the whole compound” (the n is demanded by the previous hwe, œ marks the present tense, and z marks the first person singular of the third conjugation); krok = “the main radical, altered here by the usitative from the normal form kret, and is expressive of locomotion habitually executed on four feet or on all fours.”