PASSING NOTES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22422, 17 November 1934, Page 6

PASSING NOTES

Anglo-Israol it ism is no: doubt stronger to-day than it was - last week-—at all 'events- in Dunedin. For what does.opposition. do but whet the edge of any doctrine where: absence of • facts ;has made the heart grow fonder? ' '■ Romance is always young. ~ It';is incurable.. It is a fixed cast of mind or the establishment of a settled-habit; aridi its .beliefs are as inevitable and as inescapable as the colour of a flower or the shape of a leaf. Dividing-the world,, as we rightly may, into the .“ Why’s ”, and the “ Why Not’s,” we have.two great typos of minds, with .a few nondescript .types in between. These two typos arc, the scientific;and the romantic, the positivist and the. imaginative, the prosaic and the poetic. One of them lives on documentation, on chapter and, verse, on cold and stubborn facts.,, ;l fhe..other is fascinated by mystery, ' leaps '.To, meet if, feeds on it, loves and creates it,. throws vip airy hypotheses to ; explain it. And then,- with a cool . “ Why not? ” it easts on the scientist' the onus of„ the , disproof. Scornful though each iflind-typc is of the other, dull would the world be without' either. ' Each, thrives, on the other, and theit mutual antagonism adds spice to life. What. a . fascination the adjective “ lost ” has had in all ages for the romanticist! He revels in lost continents, in lost legions, in Jdst islands of Gephalonia, in lost ■ tales of ■Miletus, in lost books of . Euclid, -in “Lost Leaders,” in lost loves, and-t jii the lost Ten Tribes of Israel. , Why should there be this fascinating .mastery.- of the .Lost Ten bribes?. In reality there is no.mystery, for-the Ten Tribes -of Israel -have neVer been found ;fbr. the simple reason ■ thaty they were never “ lost.” What , happened to them? They have merely, been victims of the over-statement of gi&eient. chroniclers. Ancient history revelled in accounts of mighty, transportations of entire nations, using a ; grandiose completeness of statement that Knew no terms. Suspiciously: familiar, in all old stories of the mbveriient .of‘ races is the view that the invaders drove the invaders south ’or west,: nqrth or east, leaving the newcomers a “ tabula rasa. ” to establish . themselves; pure and . uhmixed. GraduaL penetration is a modern conception. A few words of the old British chronicler Gildas have long, misled us as to the composition of .the; racial composition of England, implying, that the Teutonic invaders exterminated the Britons or drove them en masse to Wales and Cornwall, where tliey still survive. Modern scholarship has greatly, reduced the sweeping range of old Gildas’s statement. ; Most . of ' the , Britons, remained where' they. .were, Mcofiiing ; the serfs of the conquerors, who took wives from the British ■ women. When Sargon, Shalmaneser’s successor, iu 722 8.c., at last overcame the stubborn ‘ resistance of Samaria, --■'he- contented' himself .with -transporting only 27,280 of its inhabitants. into captivity, only the upper, classes —in fact'those who were implicated in the revolt of Hoshea. An Assyrian satrap was appointed over Samaria, while the bulk of the'population was:: allowed , to' remain peaceably in their old homes. So says A. H. Sayee. “ The exiled Israelites,” says J. Wellhauscn, “ were absorbed by the surrounding; heathenism without leaving a. trace behind, them.” As well might we speak, therefore, of the mystery of the “lost” Normans or Danes of England, or the “ lost ” Goths of Spain. The same inveterate and . incurable romanticism seeks to raise the prestige of the Anglo-Saxon race by deriving .it from the far-travelled Ten Tribes that were “ lost.” Universal and supremely laudable is the instinct which inspires this: rdffiancirig; on 'fiktional; s Npt; yet born isthe nation or race that seeks no answer to the question .of ivs “ whence,” or that says to itself, -in the words of Wordsworth, . • '('• • Here ws are in a bright and ...breathing: - world: ' • Our origin, what matters it? -- National origins, therefore, have been, from time immemorial the theme of poet and romance writer. The. Roman Virgil drags ißrieas and' his little band of Trojans all the way Lrom burning Trioy; to found Latium. ; In Francus, son of iKneas, did the French poet Rbnsard see the founder of France. With; a similar patriotic fervour Geoffrey of Monmouth erected a r ‘ Roman origin for Britain-rdr Brut, as he calls, it—giving the full history, of British kings, from Brqtus to Cadwallader. J Anglo-Saxon chroniclers pinned their faith to and Hotsa. as their ; founders, f asking us Ao believe that these were men, though each naihe: tneans a “ horse.’*Much mote glorious would be the ancestry of the’ English nation if we could, with the Anglo-Israelites, trace it back to Abra-i ham, Isaac and Jacob. But the Anglo-;' Israelites ask us to identify the Saxons with the 1 Sacae or Scythians, arid the Sacae in their turn' with the Israelite exiles in Media. And what we know of the Scythians would give us no pride in our ancestry : : ; i ■ • v

The Scythians were a nomadic race inhabiting the vast treeless stretch from the Danube north-east and east, , to the Volga—keeping herds of horses,, cattle and sheep,. living in ■ tentcovered wagons, drinking from skulls of slain enemies, filthy in their habits,; and never washing. Our New Zealand Parliament ha» closed its doors for its short tong Vacation. For a brief period no sprawling' figures will cover the soft-upholstered couches, and no restless steps will cross, and rose-red carpet, or casu-! ally enter and casually leave. It is; spring-time,’ too, and all these swallovia have come home to rest ( again. Sessional vexations have-given place to recessional 1 worries not less wearing'to mind and; temper. In fact the local parliament tarian in recess, as he once more meets-; his constituents face to face, may well, use Kipling’s Recessional Hymn aa his' daily prayer. The tumult and the shouting dies, The captains and the kings depart. Still. stands thine ancient sacrifice, A humble and a contrite heart. Lord God of Hosts be with us yet, Lest we forget, lest we forget. Often have I wondered whether a member greets with joy the rosy-fingered, dawn of the last day of session. Does it herald for him a welcome release from I a long, cold winter of discontent, with a happy summer ahead? Or does he, like a ship straining in every beam, nose his way out from a safe harbour in the teeth of a gathering gale? Surely no member leaves without regret the protecting walls of “ the finest gentlemen’s club in New Zealand;” He who for months has governed a' nation has now to meet his masters, to mingle with the Tribes of Tag and Rag and of Nob and Snob, to rack his brain with explanations, excuses; promises, protestations, to struggle with street-corner debaters,, carefully to measure to the occasion the warmth of his greetings—not too suspiciously affable and not too repellingly distant. Yes, a lump rises in my throat as I think of these returning swallows. That "outsiders see most of the game ” is as true as are many other similar aphorisms. That is, it is not true at all, encouraging though it may be to that type of critic who belongs to' the world-wide class of back-seat drivers. The man-in-the-street, of Dunedin or elsewhere, however confident be his dicta on international situations, knows precious little about them. An American journalist, seeking light in the present gloom, has gone to the foun-tain-heads for information, to the war chancelleries of Europe, and has bailed up Prime Ministers and Chancellors and

Presidents with the question, “Will war conic in Europe? ” To this straight-froin-the-shoulder question he received reassuring -answers. ! Said the: President of the Danzig Senate: “ Will there ’be war? Emphatically no.” In Warsaw and Gydnia the negative wap equally unmistakable.-.. Benes at Prague gave the 'odds, for and against peace at'. 50;50. The Hungarian Premier made no secret of the determination of his country 'to secure a ; revision of frontiers, but peacefully and without war.' Arid he is corivinced, too, that Herr Hitler “does not desire war, either -now or- at any time in the ’ future.' ‘ And at any rate the nations: to-day are too poor to' fight.” At Bucharest it was :thought that Rumania arid, Hungary would adjust their differences over Transylvania without' resort to arm's. From King Boris of Bulgaria the answer came that Bulgaria’ has had too much of war in recent years to want more of it. Our critic sums; up his conclusions:; Germany will not make war, until she can be reasonably certain of victory, arid that she cannot be for some years to come. . '. . Germany willmake no “ calculated ” war this year,' and France, will make no preventive war. An “ unplanned ” war could . break out to-morrow, .but, Etftope’s , , fear of war makes it unlikely. , . . Contrary to a considerable body of opinion abroad, it may be positively asserted that, there arc. no madmen running Germany tp-day. England,' he further says, holds the key to the date of the future war in Europe. War may be opposed indefinitely if Britain and France will fight, side by side- at the drop of the German hat. What would the British debtors say about it? Dear “Civis,”— I have lately been concerned in discussions on the pronunciation of “ acoustics.” Should one say “acoos- -• tics ”or “ acowstics.” Could -you ■ give your opinion and your authorities? - ■ —I am, etc.. Puzzled., A knotty problem, as might be expected ini a matter decided by usage and not by rule. Authorities differ strangely. The large Oxford, English Dictionary, (1888) gives' ' “ ncoostics ”,. first, “ acowstics ” . second. :,, The .Concise' Oxford gives the vo ( wel “ow.” : The newer Shorter Oxford (1933) gives. “bo ” and “ bw,” in that order. Professor Wyld, (Universal 'English Dictionary) ’ gives only “ bw.” Fowler (Modern English . Usage) argues the matter thus : Pronunciation varies between “ pw ” and “oo.” In' favour of'“po” is the ' adoption of the Word from French, the soundrof Greek “on ” in the more“rccent pronunciation of Greek, and the ’ general impression that the value of “ou” in outlandish words. is . “oo.” In, favour of the pronunciation, “ow ” l is the older and still' common Erig- ' lish pronunciation of, Greek; and the normal value of “ ou ” in English; . If the .word came into popular use ;it would probably be with ’’ ow,” which even now perhaps tends to prevail. The .trouble,; has arisen from the fact that “ acoustic.” is,:,a learned sefni-acien-tiflic Word, a late-comer into the language, introduced in the. 17th century. It has never entered into common speech. And, being a Greek word, it took the pronunciation , from, Greek scholars accustomed to, pronounce the Greek “ ou,” with the .“.ow ” of “ cow.’.’ Of late, years the authoritative mmciatipn of Greek has changed. Classical ‘ purists now pronounce Greek “ou” as “ po.” Hence the divergence of . opinion regarding the .pronunciation of “acoustics.”.

On the point whether we shbuld say “coo”' or “cow.’? in, hcoustica the expert, committee of the 8.8. C. made a deliverance vfhichmay’-'or may not he approved. 1 The composition- of the" committee entitles it. to some authority : Robert Bridges - (late Poet Laureate), Sir Johnstone Forbes-Robertson, Professor . Daniel Jones, A.. Lloyd James, George Bernard. Shaw, .Logan Pearsall Smith. , In its decision on the word the committee approved 'of “coo”though not unanimously; S.P.E. Tract No. 2? explaihs:tho, findings of the committee, suggesting .that the advocates of “ cotv ” are those who have imbibed the older tradition of Greek,pronunciation in}England The advocates of' ‘‘cow ” may rea-. • ~ sonably assert that; most words in. • which “ou ” occurs in accented , syllables are pronounced with the “bw” diphthong. Yet in common . talk the “ cob ’’ sound: hag an oyer-,: whelming ; predominance—-for example,’ youth, uncouth, ’tour, route, djpur, . bourn, ghoul,’OusV. And a long.'list’ of words might l be given, in which the- , pronunciation of “on ”'as. “ow ”is in., , a hopeless minority. Since common practice and phonetic ■ propriety fail us, ive may be allowed .to consider the comparative agreeable- ; ness of‘the. two'sounds,' That is, which of them makes the most pleasant word? Now. those who haverany feeling'in this matter? will all agree : that, “op ” is a more pleasant sound than “bw .it is indeed the softest, , of all true Romance vowels, and is preferable for its .euphonic quality,: Tt .was asserted, in committee that , scientists were ' almost all "habituated . to “ cob.” On inquiry this turned out ■; to be an' exaggeration. In Oxford ; ■ and Cambridge, where Greek was still, alive, both “coo'” and-.“cow,” were ' in, use among, the-scientists. “ Goo ” is certainly more euphonious than “ cow.” , Is that -why the Scot's call a cow what they do?. And one docs not “cow” like a dove. ", " Cxvis. '