On The Proto-Ethnic Condition Of Asia Minor, The Khalubes (Ohalybes), Idæi Dactyli, And Their Relations With The Mythology Of Ionia.

ON THE PROTO-ETHNIC CONDITION OF ASIA MINOR , THE KHALUBES ( OHALYBES ) , ID ? I DACTYLI , AND THEIR RELATIONS WITH THE MYTHOLOGY OF IONIA .

By HYDE CLARKE , F . B . S , Fellow of the Royal Society of Northern Antiquaries of Copenhagen , Gorr . Mem . of the American Oriental Society , § -e . On a former occasion I called the attention of the Ethnological Society to the occupation of the mountains of Asia Minor by IOAV tribes engaged

in mining , referring to the Khalubes of old and the gipseys of the Besh Parmak , or Five Finger Mountains of the present day . ( On the Propagation of Mining and Metallurgy , Ethuol . Journal , vol . iv ., & c . ) Recent observations have led me to take up

the subject of the old hill-mining tribes in more detail , because they give us what Ave must for the time accept as the oldest known populations in Asia Minor ; because they give a key to the diffusion of population in the region , and the movements of the subsequent races ; and , thirdly , because they had a close connexion Avith the

mythology of the district . The opinion of eminent scholars , and particularly those of the Sanskrit school , is that the origin of the mythology of Greece and Ionia is to be sought among the Aryans , and they have given such ingenious explanations from Sanskrit

philology , and such elucidations from Indian practises , as to have gained the assent of the learned world . Few have dared to doubt doctrines supported by men of deserved reputation , but , the more I have thought upon it , the more I have been convinced that the mythology of Ionia at all

events could not be the absolute creation of the Aryans or Indo-Europeans . As I succeeded in determining populations long antecedent to the Indo-European , and altogether alien , so I saw that , not only must these populations have had a worship of some kind , but that their Avorship AA'as already ancient in the eai'ly Indo-European epoch .

It is therefore utterly inconsistent to suggest an Indo-European origin ; and , however plausible the explanations may be , they cannot be correct-. The explanation I suggest is this , that the Indo-Europeans , in adopting the gods and worship of the anterior populations , chiefly applied an

Indo-European nomenclature , and it is thus that scholars have been able to suggest etymological explanations of meanings and appellations , which , after all , are long posterior to the things themselves . In some cases ancient and new Aryan words were retained and transmitted by the Indo-European

settlers . As to resemblances betAveen practices in India and those in the west , Ave have yet to ascertain what are Dravidian , and Avhat are Aryan , and what—anterior to either—what belonging to that Tibeto-Caucasian period Avhich unites India and the western Avorld .

Mythology is becoming a most important branch of ethnology , because it affords us records of some of the earliest impressions of the human mind , and has its relations to the history of mind , as bones and skulls to the history of the human frameand as implements become material tablets

, of mental records . Mythology ancl philology areparticularly valuable as assisting us in determination Avhere written history gives us little or no help .

The Avhole mountain systems of Asia Minor , its backbone and ribs , are metalliferous , and they present deposits of hematite iron , accessible on the surface , in the neighbourhood of Avood , ancl easily portable . One legend affirms that the discovery of iron on Mount Ida was owing to

theaccidental burning of woods fusing iron ore . This is inconsistent with another myth of the discovery of iron there , and , although it may express a possible mode of the early discovery of the smelting process , yet the smelting of iron ore in Asia Minor Avas propagated by mining tribes . The

application of the theory of an iron age , and indeed of the bronze age , will have to be greatly modified ,, so far as relates to Asia Minor and other countries of a like formation .

Ihese mountains Avere occupied in the historical period by tribes engaged in smelting , these Avere ¦ called Khalubes . It Avill be shown that these pursuits are actually carried on in modern times near the site of the Khalubes and that of the ¦ Daktnli .

The Khalubes of Xenophon were barbarians , and the point naturally suggests itself that they were on that spot long antecedent . At the earliest date in Greek history and fable , iron is spoken of , and there arc several legends in reference to it . It is by piecing these together

we shall get a consistent Avhole , helping us to a clue to the ethnology , mythology , and history ; for Avhere Ave have bones enough of the skeleton , so one bone helps us to a knowledge of the other ,. and Ave can build all together .

It is necessary first to explain the present stats ¦ of the subject . Greek mythology and archaic history are made up by a confused intermixture of materials from the various countries of Asia Minor , Crete , Cyprus , aud Hellas , aud these have been treated first by the Romans , and so

successively by all others , from the nearest western point , namely , an Hellenic aspect . Now , if the myths originated in the east and passed to the Avest , it is evident Ave shall be locking through a . wrong medium . This is irrespective of the false etymologies and confusion of events perpetrated

by the Greeks themselves , in some cases utterly ignorant of the real events , and unpossessed of the means of elucidating them . Another cause of difficulty is that , iu the migrations to and fro , the legends of one place were localized as those of