AUTHORS OF EARLY TAMIL CULTURE 13 the invading Dravidian. To escape out of the difficulty, an ingenious theory of Proto-Dravidian has been propounded. The Proto-Dravidian is as unsound as the theory of a Dravidian invasion. My firm conviction is that the ancient Tamils were inheritors of the lithic cultures of South India.” Next we have the evidence of the linguist and philologist. Culture is no more criterion of race than a language. The expression race, like the Sanskrit term Dharma, is difficult to translate and both words have been used vaguely and loosely, and, I may add, unscientifically by writers on these subjects. The latest writers on the subject of racial questions have come to the conclusion, and rightly in our opinion, that racialism is a myth and a dangerous myth (See Julian Huxley-Race in Europe - Oxford Pamphlets No. 51939). A remarkable consequence of recent scientific studies by ethnologists is to attach more and more value to culture and less value to race. Turning to Europe we know today of a Latin culture and an Anglo-Saxon culture and not of a Latin race and an Anglo-Saxon race. In the same way we have to treat of the Aryan and Dravidian cultures in India. About 1853 this unfortunate term Aryan was introduced into the English language by that distinguished Orientalist, Max Müller. If Max Müller, like Sir William Jones, had stopped with the interpretation of the term Aryan as a name for the group of peoples who spoke the Aryan language, he would have done a distinct service for the peace of the world. But as misfortune would
