Thus was I deprived for a time of the services of Antonio.  I continued for a few days without a domestic, at the end of which time I hired a certain Cantabrian or Basque, a native of the village of Hernani, in Guipuscoa, who was strongly recommended to me.

CHAPTER XXXVII

Euscarra—­Basque not Irish—­Sanskrit and Tartar Dialects—­A Vowel Language—­Popular Poetry—­The Basques—­Their Persons—­Basque Women.

I now entered upon the year 1838, perhaps the most eventful of all those which I passed in Spain.  The despacho still continued open, with a somewhat increasing sale.  Having at this time little of particular moment with which to occupy myself, I committed to the press two works, which for some time past had been in the course of preparation.  These were the Gospel of St. Luke in the Spanish Gypsy and the Euscarra languages.

With respect to the Gypsy Gospel I have little to say, having already spoken of it in a former work (The Zincali):  it was translated by myself, together with the greater part of the New Testament, during my long intercourse with the Spanish Gypsies.  Concerning the Luke in Euscarra, however, it will be as well to be more particular, and to avail myself of the present opportunity to say a few words concerning the language in which it was written, and the people for whom it was intended.

The Euscarra, then, is the proper term for a certain speech or language, supposed to have been at one time prevalent throughout Spain, but which is at present confined to certain districts, both on the French and Spanish side of the Pyrenees, which are laved by the waters of the Cantabrian Gulf or Bay of Biscay.  This language is commonly known as the Basque or Biscayan, which words are mere modifications of the word Euscarra, the consonant B having been prefixed for the sake of euphony.  Much that is vague, erroneous, and hypothetical, has been said and written concerning this tongue.  The Basques assert that it was not only the original language of Spain, but also of the world, and that from it all other languages are derived; but the Basques are a very ignorant people, and know nothing of the philosophy of language.  Very little importance, therefore, need be attached to any opinion of theirs on such a subject.  A few amongst them, however, who affect some degree of learning, contend, that it is neither more nor less than a dialect of the Phoenician, and, that the Basques are the descendants of a Phoenician colony, established at the foot of the Pyrenees at a very remote period.  Of this theory, or rather conjecture, as it is unsubstantiated by the slightest proof, it is needless to take further notice than to observe that, provided the Phoenician language, as many of the truly learned have supposed and almost proved, was a dialect of the Hebrew, or closely allied to it, it were as unreasonable to suppose that the Basque is derived from it, as that the Kamschatdale and Cherokee are dialects of the Greek or Latin.