He insistently uses the term "Hindu" instead of India in most cases. Although I am not sure if it was the standard back than. Regardless of what he says. It seems like “Hindu” is just a Turkish name given by various Turkic khaganates to Indians. Because obviously they are indians there. Although "Hindu" doesn't seem like Turkish. Indian (native) in Turkish called “yer+li” (Means something like with ground) which possibly used to refer the bird because it wasn't able to fly. Regardless of origin of the name “Hindu” it is obviously used relating to the Bird because it wasn't able to fly. It is only possible to establish this connection in Turkish. Meanwhile Turkey the bird called Turkey in the West, in Turkey and surrounding geography it is called “Hindu”. (Additionally “in+di” means landed in Turkish. Like “Uçak indi” means “Airplane landed”. “-an” is a pretty common Turkish suffix. “Uç+an” means thing that flies. “indi+an” is not valid but makes sense. Possibly constructed by someone who is not native speaker.)
He usually writes something that sounds weird to hint something. (Hint = India in Turkish although Hindistan is used as place name normally. There is proverb for instance “Bulunmaz Hint kumaşı.” which means “Impossible to find (very rare) Indian/Hint fabric.”) Although first pragprah is mostly my fabrication to give some context, followings will be based on his implications. In most cases quoting him directly may not make much sense he probably mostly points out where to look for.
He cross uses terms cats and Aryan in same context without establishing a direct connection. Although today it is no secret Jews consider Arya refers to a lion. He probably implies a context regarding slavery and behaviour of cats. The point is that he shy away from establishing this connection himself. Instead lay outs absurd statements. Gives cat and mouse example. Maybe aryan is related to Turkish word "who searches". Although in modern Turkish it is “arayan” but “arıyan” also works. Just after this he mentions “as” root. In Turkish lion is “as+lan” but also called “ars+lan”. "lan" is common suffix/root that lion obviously originates from. As another instance tiger is "kap+lan". The sequence of his references makes it clear that he seconds this :D He has a long parapgraph there doesn't really makes much sense. He may be emphasizing "am" as it is pretty much Turkish with absurd statements like don't overlook this auxiliary verb. Yeah it is definitely stupid but he has to say opposite as he can't say this. And also refers to "as" in same context possibly referring s/z/sh sounds placed to various language an alphabets around 9th century. He ultra verbosely mentions how “as” loose all it meanins as it evolves to “to be” from to breath. Emphasize even though it is Aryan root, extra verbosely again. Suspiciously unnecessarily emphasising it is not Turanian. He is associating a process with "as". As “as” is related to concept of process but it is really hard to understand why he is doing this undirectly. Maybe he wants you to discover this by yourself to imply this is the nature of this text.
He mentions French decimating numbers except keeping sexagesimal clock system. Possibly relating manipulation of numerals. The verb “decimating” is interesting because 10 base system called decimal. This one is definetely important.
He mentions cross cultural units frequently like shekel or dharma which probalby implicates there is something there.
He mentions alphabets originating through Egyptian hyroglyphs > Phœnicians > Greek and he implies in the process exact representation is lost. Something I was thinking about. Phoenician letters represent roots not directly sounds. He clearly implies this but do not directly says it.
He refers various invader ruler groups as Turanians. According to wikipedia all referred as Nomadic Iranians. Although some considered Turkic in Turkish literature. Although maybe they were trying to frame nomadic populations as Turanians as this was the part of propaganda he was participating. But maybe he was also probably trying to mislead British in order to protect cultural heritage in places like Afghanistan. Although it is even possible that British believed him and they later used proxies like Russia and US to fix the situation. Although they would be collecting everything anyway this does not translates to too much sense. It seems like Soviets and Taliban pillaged heavily. It definitely doesn't make much sense for Afghanistan to be really that special. I may be overspeculating.
Max Müller's work is definitely sounds like propaganda material. He definetely constantly try to sound like an Aryan fanatic. He frequently exaggerates things. If it translates to he is implying something consistently it may worth the effort but I am not sure.
"If you are fond of botany, there is a flora rich enough for many Hookers." I wonder if he is implying there is a link between Brittany and Botany. He is talking about India though. Hooker probably refers to parasitic plants. This sentence is definitely an outlier. (It seems like he is just referring to botanist over his contemporary named Joseph Dalton Hooker and his father. Regardless this sentence is clearly exaggeration. Botany is irrelevant.) I probably should stick to parts related to linguistics. I don't know if related but there is an interesting family of plant in the region. Rafflesiaceae (Sapria himalayana, Rafflesia arnoldii). There aren't many family of this type of plants. There are even cases where similar parasitic plants classified under this family by assumption. And even for the one still classified as different this is written on wikipedia: “The relationship of the Apodanthaceae to other plant families remains unresolved, though recent research has given more clarity to the family's position and suggests inclusion in the order Malpighiales with a possible link to the family Rafflesiaceae.”. Another family named Hydnoroideae mentioned to be as strangest family of plants in Wikipedia. Those may not be as parasitic as ones in the Rafflesiaceae family.
"Western Europeans first learned about plants of this genus from French surgeon and naturalist Louis Deschamps when he was in Java between 1791 and 1794; but his notes and illustrations were seized by the British in 1798 and were not available to Western scientists until 1861" Rafflesia, Those plants look like aliens and very absurd in many aspects. If he is pointing something related to botany. It may be this. Louis Auguste Deschamps. As quote is from a text published in 1883. It doesn't mean he had access to privileged access to this. Although interesting because hooker may refer a classification regarding parasitic nature of the plant and it may not known at that time. Let me rephrase the quote with just replacing hookers. If you are fond of botany, there is a flora rich enough for many parasitic species. I don't know when was existence of similar plants around India known. (Looking very same but size may be too different.) One specy lives in Himalayas and names as so and he mentiones Himalayas in previous sentence. And interestingly another main family of such plants Balanophoraceae native and common in Ceylon (Sri Lanka) which is the only other place mentioned in the same previous sentence. (Balanophora thwaitesii endemic to Sri Lanka). Obviously next step is researching local names for those plants. When you google the one that endemic to Sri Lanka it is almost non-existent online except there is a publication dating to 1886. Published at London. What a coincidence. However this publications mentions this new specy suggested and named at 1873 and few details with drawing were published. (Although those are just realted to suggested classification. Because of remoteness it didn't make it out to the literature. It is not odd that there isn't much online as they argue it is not clear whether this one should be classified as another specy.) For species in Rafflesiaceae family names like Corpse flower, Devil's rose are given in local languages.Association with devil may be result of Western influence. There may be a connection between cat and climbing also related to climbing plants. Dravidian Languages has common words like kattu/kettu meaning knot/tie but words for cats are not related. But names for the cats like kitta/cat/kedi used in rest of the world may be originating from common root related to climbing. Atlhough this is little bit too far fetched. I feel like I am getting to pretty irreleavent points that obviously wasn't implied. There is obviously no reason for him to imply this. Point may be that those flowers were referred by terms like ghost/corpse/immortal. So people knew they weren't alive like other plants. It is possible some names like setan/sattan may relate to immortality originally. It is not easy to explore. Although there is another name given includes the word rākṣasa which heavily interpreted as demon. ChatGPT is telling me its etymology is paradoxical and it wasn't originally meant to anything like devil. This does require further investigation. As clustering of all kind of names relating to immortality cannot be a coincidence.