Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Races and Peoples - Lectures on the Science of Ethnography
Author: Brinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Races and Peoples - Lectures on the Science of Ethnography" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



  RACES AND PEOPLES

  LECTURES

  ON THE

  SCIENCE OF ETHNOGRAPHY

  BY
  DANIEL G. BRINTON, A.M., M.D.,

  _Professor of Ethnology at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia,
  and of American Archæology and Linguistics in the University of Pennsylvania;
  President of the American Folk-Lore Society and of the
  Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia; Member
  of the Anthropological Societies of Berlin and Vienna and of
  the Ethnographical Societies of Paris and Florence, of
  the Royal Society of Antiquaries, Copenhagen, the
  Royal Academy of History of Madrid, the
  American Philosophical Society, the
  American Antiquarian Society,
  Etc., Etc., Etc._

  PHILADELPHIA
  DAVID McKAY, PUBLISHER
  1901


  COPYRIGHT
  BY D. G. BRINTON.



TO HORATIO HALE,


  PHILOLOGIST TO THE UNITED STATES EXPLORING
  EXPEDITION IN 1838-42,
  WHOSE MANY AND VALUABLE
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO LINGUISTICS AND ETHNOGRAPHY
  PLACE HIM TO-DAY AMONG THE FOREMOST AUTHORITIES
  ON THESE SCIENCES,
  THIS VOLUME
  IS INSCRIBED IN RESPECT AND FRIENDSHIP
  BY THE AUTHOR.



PREFACE.


The lectures which appear in this volume were delivered at the Academy
of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, in the early months of 1890. They
have since been written out, and references added in the foot-notes to
a number of works and articles, which will enable the student to pursue
his readings on any point in which he may be interested. My endeavor
has been to present the results of the latest and most accurate
researches on the subjects treated; though no one can be better aware
than myself that in compressing such an extensive science into so
limited a space, I have often necessarily been superficial. It is some
excuse for the publication, if one is needed, that I am not aware of
any other recent work upon this science written in the English language.

  _Philadelphia, August, 1890._



CONTENTS.


  LECTURE I.
                                                                  PAGE

  THE PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY                              17

  CONTENTS.--Differences and resemblances in individuals and
  races the basis of Ethnography. The _Bones_. Craniology.
  Its limited value. Long and short skulls. Height of skull.
  Sutures. Inca bone. The orbital index. The nasal index.
  The maxillary and facial angles. The cranial capacity. The
  teeth. The iliac bones. Length of the arms. The flattened
  tibia. The projecting heel. The heart line. The Color.
  Its extent; cause; scale of colors. Color of the eyes. The
  Hair. Shape in cross section; abundance. The muscular
  structure; anomalies in; muscular habits: arrow releases.
  Steatopygy, Stature and proportion; the “canon of proportion;”
  special senses; the color-sense. Ethnic relations of
  the sexes. Beauty; muscular power; brain capacity; viability.
  Correlation of physical traits to vital powers. Tolerance
  of climate and disease. Causes of the fixation of ethnic
  traits. Climate; food supply; natural selection; conscious
  selection; the physical ideal; sexual preference; abhorrence
  of incest; exogamous marriages. Causes of variation in
  types. Changes in environment; migrations; reversion;
  albinism and melanism; fecundity and sterility. The mingling
  of races; métissage. Physical criteria of racial superiority.
  Review of physical elements.


  LECTURE II.

  THE PSYCHICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY                             51

  CONTENTS.--The mental differences of races. Ethnic psychology.
  Cause of psychical development.

  I. THE ASSOCIATIVE ELEMENTS. 1. The Social Instincts:
  sexual impulse; primitive marriage; conception of love;
  parental affection; filial and fraternal affection; friendship;
  ancestral worship; the gens or clan; the tribe; personal
  loyalty; the social organization; systems of consanguinity;
  position of woman in the state; ethical standards; modesty.
  2. Language: universality of; primeval speech; rise of
  linguistic stocks; their number; grammatical structure;
  classes of languages; morphologic scheme; relation of
  language to thought; significance of language in ethnography.
  3. Religion: universality of; early forms; family and tribal
  religions; universal or world religions; ethnic study of religions;
  comparison of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism;
  material and ideal religions; associative influences of religions.
  4. The Arts of Life: architecture; agriculture;
  domestication of animals; inventions.

  II. THE DISPERSIVE ELEMENTS: adaptability of man to surroundings.
  1. The Migratory Instincts: love of roaming;
  early commerce; lines of traffic and migration. 2. The
  Combative Instincts: primitive condition of war; love of
  combat; its advantages; heroes; development through
  conflict.


  LECTURE III.

  THE BEGINNINGS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF RACES                          79

  CONTENTS.--The origin of Man. Theories of monogenism and
  polygenism; of evolution; heterogenesis. Identities point
  to one origin. Birthplace of the species. The oldest human
  relics. Remains of the highest apes. Question of climate.
  Negative arguments. Darwin’s belief that the species originated
  in Africa confirmed; but with modifications. Quarternary
  geography of Europe and Africa. Northern Africa
  united with Southern Europe. Former shore lines. The
  Sahara Sea. The quaternary continents of “Eurafrica”
  and “Austafrica.” Relics of man in them. Man in pre-glacial
  times. The Glacial Age. Effect on man. His condition
  and acquirements. Appearance of primitive man.
  His development into races. Approximate data of this.
  Localities where it occurred. The “areas of characterization.”
  Relations of continents to races. Theory of Linnaeus;
  of modern ethnography. The continental areas:
  Eurafrica; Austafrica; Asia; America. Classification of
  races. Subdivisions of races; branches; stocks; groups;
  peoples; tribes; nations. General ethnographic scheme.
  Other terms: ethnos and ethnic; culture; civilization.
  Stadia of culture.


  LECTURE IV.

  THE EURAFRICAN RACE; SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN
  BRANCH                                                           103

  CONTENTS.--The White Race. Synonyms. Properly an African
  Race; relative areas; purest specimens. Types of the
  White race; Libyo-Teutonic type; Cymric type; Celtic
  type; Euskaric type. Variability of traits. Primal home
  of the White Race not in Asia, but in Eurafrica. Early
  migrations and subdivisions. North Mediterranean and
  South Mediterranean branches.

  _A._--THE SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

  I. THE HAMITIC STOCK. Relation to Semitic. 1. The Libyan
  Group. Location. Peoples included. Physical appearance.
  The Libyan blondes; languages. Early history;
  European affiliations; relations to Iberian tribes: the names
  _Iberi_ and _Berberi_. Government. Migration. The Etruscans
  as Libyans. Later history; present culture. Syrian
  Hamites and their influence. 2. The Egyptian Group.
  Kinship to Libyans. Physical appearance. The stone age
  in Egypt. Antiquity of Egyptian culture. Its influence.
  Physical traits. 3. The East African Group. Relations to
  Egypt.

  II. THE SEMITIC STOCK. First entered Arabia from Africa.
  1. The Arabian Group. Early divisions and culture. The
  Arabs. Physical types; mental temperament; religious
  idealisms. 2. The Abyssinian Group. Tribes included.
  Period of migration. Condition. 3. The Chaldean Group.
  Tribes included. The modern Jew.


  LECTURE V.

  THE EURAFRICAN RACE; NORTH MEDITERRANEAN
  BRANCH                                                           141

  CONTENTS.--_B._--THE NORTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

  I. THE EUSKARIC STOCK. Basques and their congeners. Physical
  type. Language.

  II. _The Aryac Stock._ Synonyms. Origin of the Aryans.
  Supposed Asiatic origin now doubted. The Aryac physical
  type. The prot-Aryac language. Culture of proto-Aryans.
  The “proto-Aryo-Semitic” tongue. Development of inflections.
  Prot-Aryac migrations. Southern and northern
  streams. Approximate dates. Scheme of Aryac migrations.
  Divisions. 1. The Celtic Peoples. Members and
  location. Physical and mental traits. 2. The Italic Peoples.
  Ancient and modern members. Physical traits. The
  modern Romance nations. Mental traits. 3. The Illyric
  Peoples. Members and physical traits. 4. The Hellenic
  Peoples. Ancient and modern Greeks. Physical type.
  Influence of Greek culture. 5. The Lettic Peoples. Position
  and language. 6. The Teutonic Peoples. Ancient
  and modern members. Mental character. Recent progress.
  7. The Slavonic Peoples. Ancient and modern members.
  Physical traits. Recent expansion. Character. Relations
  to Asiatic Aryans. 8. The Indo-Eranic Peoples. Arrival
  in Asia. Location. Members. Indian Aryans. Appearance.
  Mental aptitude.

  III. THE CAUCASIC STOCK. Its languages. Various groups
  and members. Physical types. Error of supposing the
  white race came from the Caucasus.


  LECTURE VI.

  THE AUSTAFRICAN RACE                                             173

  CONTENTS.--Former geography of Africa. Area of characterization
  of the race. Its early extension. Divisions.

  I. THE NEGRILLOS. Classical tales of Pygmies. Physical characters.
  Habits. Relationship to Bushmen. Description
  of Bushmen and Hottentots.

  II. THE NEGROES. Home of the true negroes. 1. The Nilotic
  Group. 2. The Sudanese Group. 3. The Senegambian
  Group. 4. The Guinean Group.

  III. THE NEGROIDS. Physical traits. Early admixtures.
  1. The Nubian Group. 2. The Bantu Group.

  GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE RACE. Low intellectual position.
  Origin of negroes in the United States.


  LECTURE VII.

  THE ASIAN RACE                                                   195

  CONTENTS.--Physical geography of Asia. Physical traits of
  the Race. Its branches.

  I. THE SINITIC BRANCH. Subdivisions. 1. The Chinese.
  Origin and early migrations. Psychical elements. Arts.
  Religions. Philosophers. Late migrations. 2. The Thibetan
  Group. Character. Physical traits. Tribes. 3. The Indo-Chinese
  Group. Members. Character and Culture.

  II. THE SIBIRIC BRANCH. Synonyms. Location. Physical
  appearance. 1. The Tungusic Group. Members. Location.
  Character. 2. Mongolic Group. Migrations. 3. The
  Tataric Group. History. Language. Customs. 4. The
  Finnic Group. Origin and migrations. Physical traits.
  Boundaries of the Sibiric Peoples. The “Turanian”
  theories. 5. The Arctic Group. Members. Location.
  Physical traits. 6. The Japanese Group. Members. Location.
  History. Culture. The Koreans.


  LECTURE VIII.

  INSULAR AND LITTORAL PEOPLES                                     221

  CONTENTS.--Variability of islanders and coast peoples. Physical
  geography of Oceanica. Ethnographic divisions.

  I. THE NEGRITIC STOCK. Subdivisions. 1. The Negrito
  Group. Members. Former extension. Physical aspect.
  Culture. 2. The Papuan Group. Location. Physical
  traits. Culture and language. 3. The Melanesian Group.
  Physical traits. Habits. Languages. Ethnic affinities
  of Papuas and Melanesians.

  II. THE MALAYIC STOCK. Location. Subdivisions. Affinities
  with the Asian Race and original home. 1. The Western or
  Malayan Groups. Physical traits. Character. Extension.
  Culture. Presence in Hindostan. 2. The Eastern or
  Polynesian Group. Physical traits. Migrations. Character
  and culture. Easter Island.

  III. THE AUSTRALIC STOCK. Affinities between the Australians
  and Dravidians. 1. The Australian Group. Tasmanians
  and Australians. Physical traits. Culture. 2. The
  Dravidian Group. Early extension. Members. Culture.
  Languages.


  LECTURE IX.

  THE AMERICAN RACE                                                247

  CONTENTS.--Peopling of America. Divisions. 1. The Arctic
  Group. Members. Location. Character. 2. The North
  Atlantic Group. Tinneh, Algonkins, Iroquois, Dakotas,
  Muskokis, Caddoes, Shoshonees, etc. 3. The North Pacific
  Group. Tlinkit, Haidahs, Californians, Pueblos. 4. The
  Mexican Group. The Aztecs or Nahuas. Other nations.
  5. The Inter-Isthmian Group. The Mayas. Their culture.
  Other tribes. 6. The South Atlantic Group. The Caribs,
  the Arawaks, the Tupis. Other tribes. 7. The South Pacific
  Group. The Qquichuas or Peruvians. Their culture.
  Other tribes.


  LECTURE X.

  PROBLEMS AND PREDICTIONS                                         277

  CONTENTS.--I. ETHNOGRAPHIC PROBLEMS. 1. The problem of
  acclimation. Various answers. Europeans in the tropics.
  Austafricans in cold climates; in warm climates. The
  Asian race. Tolerance of the American race. Theories of
  acclimation. Conclusion. 2. The problem of amalgamation.
  Effect on offspring. Mingling of white and black
  races. Infertility. Mingling of colored races. Influence
  of early and present social conditions. Is amalgamation
  desirable? As applied to white race; to colored races.
  3. The problem of civilization. Urgency of the problem.
  Influence of civilization on savages. Failure of missionary
  efforts. Cause of the failure. Suggestions.

  II. THE DESTINY OF RACES. Extinction of races. 1. The
  American race. Are the Indians dying out? Conflicting
  statements. They are perishing. Diminution of insular
  peoples; causes of fatality. The Austafrican race. The
  Mongolian race stationary. Wonderful growth of the
  Eurafrican race. Influence of the Semitic element. The
  future Aryo-Semitic race.

  Relation of ethnography to historical and political science.

  INDEX OF AUTHORS                                                 301

  INDEX OF SUBJECTS                                                309



MAPS, SCHEMES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.


         *       *       *       *       *

  PAGE

  Figs. 1 and 2. Long and short skulls                              21

  Fig. 3. Lines of sutures in the skull                             22

  Fig. 4. Lines and angles of skull measurements                    25

  Fig. 5. Cross-sections of hairs                                   32

  Fig. 6. Primary arrow-release                                     34

  Fig. 7. Mediterranean arrow-release                               34

  Fig. 8. Mongolian arrow-release                                   35

         *       *       *       *       *

  Scheme of Principal Physical Elements                             49

  Scheme of Geologic Time during the Age of Man in the Eastern
    Hemisphere                                                      96

  General Ethnographic Scheme                                       99

  Scheme of the Eurafrican Race: South Mediterranean Branch        104

  Scheme of the Eurafrican Race: North Mediterranean Branch        140

  Scheme of Aryac Migration                                        153

  Scheme of the Austafrican Race                                   174

  Scheme of the Asian Race                                         194

  Scheme of Insular and Littoral Peoples                           220

         *       *       *       *       *

  Outlines of the Eastern Hemisphere in the Early Quaternary        88

  Ethnic Chart of the Eurafrican Race                              112

  Ethnic Chart of Africa                                           176

  Ethnic Chart of Eurasia and Asia                                 198

  Ethnic Chart of Hindostan                                        244

  Indian Tribes of the United States                               256



LECTURES ON ETHNOGRAPHY.



LECTURE I.

THE PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY.

    CONTENTS.--Differences and resemblances in individuals and races
    the basis of Ethnography. The _Bones_. Craniology. Its limited
    value. Long and short skulls. Sutures. Inca bone. The orbital
    index. The nasal index. The maxillary and facial angles. The
    cranial capacity. The teeth. The iliac bones. Length of the arms.
    The flattened tibia. The projecting heel. The heart line. The
    Color. Its extent; cause; scale of colors. Color of the eyes. The
    Hair. Shape in cross section; abundance. The muscular structure;
    anomalies in; muscular habits; arrow releases. Steatopygy. Stature
    and proportion; the “canon of proportion;” special senses; the
    color sense. Ethnic relations of the sexes. Correlation of physical
    traits to vital powers. Causes of the fixation of ethnic traits.
    Climate; food supply; natural selection; conscious selection; the
    physical ideal; sexual preference; abhorrence of incest; exogamous
    marriages. Causes of variation in types. The mingling of races.
    Physical criteria of racial superiority. Review of physical
    elements.


That no two persons are identical in appearance is such a truism that
we are apt to overlook its significance. The parent can rarely be
recognized from the traits of the child, the brother from those of the
sister, the family from its members.

On the other hand, the individual peculiarities become lost in those of
the race. It is a common statement that to our eyes all Chinamen look
alike, or that one cannot distinguish an Indian “buck” from a “squaw.”
Yet you recognize very well the one as a Chinaman, the other as an
Indian. The traits of the race thus overslaugh the variable characters
of the family, the sex or the individual, and maintain themselves
uniform and unalterable in the pure blood of the stock through all
experience.

This fact is the corner-stone of the science of Ethnography, whose
aim is to study the differences, physical and mental, between men _in
masses_, and ascertain which of these differences are least variable
and hence of most value in classifying the human species into its
several natural varieties or types.

In daily life and current literature the existence of such varieties
is fully recognized. The European and African, or White and Black
races, are those most familiar to us; but the American Indian and the
Mongolian are not rare, and are recognized also as distinct from each
other and ourselves. These common terms for the races are not quite
accurate; but they illustrate a tendency to identify the most prominent
types of the species with the great continental areas, and in this
I shall show that the popular judgment is in accord with scientific
reasoning.

If an ordinary observer were asked what the traits are which fix the
racial type in his mind, he would certainly omit many which are highly
esteemed by the man of science. He would have nothing to say, for
instance, about the internal structures or organs, because they are not
visible; but in approaching the subject from a scientific direction,
we must lay most stress upon these, as their peculiarities decide the
external traits which strike the eye.

Nor does the casual observer note the mental or physical differences
which exist between the races whom he recognizes; yet these are
not less permanent and not less important than those which concern
the physical economy only. In both these directions the student of
ethnography as a science must pursue careful researches.

In the present lecture I shall pass in review the physical elements
held to be most weighty in the discrimination of racial types; and,
first, those relating to

_The Bones._--Most important are the measurements of the skull, that
science called _craniology_, or _craniometry_.

Ethnologists who are merely anatomists have made too much of this
science. They have applied it to the exclusion of other elements, and
have given it a prominence which it does not deserve. The shape of the
skull is no distinction of race in the individual; only in the mass,
in the average of large numbers, has it importance. Even here its
value is not racial. Within the limits of the same people, as among
the Slavonians, for example, the most different skulls are found, and
even the pure-blood natives of some small islands in the Pacific Ocean
present widely various forms.[1]

Experiments on the lower animals prove that the skull is easily moulded
by trifling causes. Darwin found that he could produce long, or short,
or non-symmetrical skulls in rabbits by training.[2] The shape also
bears a relation to stature. As a general rule short men have short or
rounded heads, tall men have long heads. The longest skulled nation in
Europe are the Norwegians, who are also the tallest; the roundest are
the Auvergnats, who, of all the European whites, are the shortest.

Nevertheless, employed cautiously, in large averages, and with a
careful regard for all the other ethnic elements, the measurements of
the skull are extremely useful as accessory data of comparison.

Some craniologists have run up these measurements to more than a
hundred; but those worth mentioning in this connection are but few.
There is, first, the proportion which the length of the head has to
its breadth. This makes the distinction between long, medium and broad
skulls, “dolicho-cephalic,” “meso-cephalic,” and “brachy-cephalic.” In
the medium skull the transverse bears to the longitudinal diameter the
proportion of about 80:100. The proportion 75:100 would make quite a
long skull, and 85:100 quite a broad skull, the extreme variations not
exceeding 70:100-90:100. (Figs. 1 and 2.)

[Illustration: FIGS. 1 AND 2.--Long and Short Skulls.]

The Asiatic race or typical Mongolians are generally brachy-cephalic,
the Eskimos and African negroes dolicho-cephalic; while the whites of
Europe and American Indians present great diversity.

The lengthening of the skull may be anteriorly or posteriorly, and
this is probably more significant of brain power than its width. In
the black race the lengthening is occipital, that is at the rear,
indicating a preponderance of the lower mental powers.

[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Lines of Sutures in the Skull.]

The height of the skull is another measurement which is much respected
by craniologists; but they are far from agreed as to the points from
which the lines shall be drawn, so that it is difficult to compare
their results.[3] The “sutures,” or lines of union between the several
bones of the skull, present indications of great value. In the lower
races they are much simpler than in the higher, and they become
obliterated earlier in life; the bones of the skull thus uniting into
a compact mass and preventing further expansion of the cavity occupied
by the brain.[4] (Fig. 3.) Occasionally small separated bones are found
in these sutures, more frequently in some races than in others. One
of these, toward the back of the head, occurs so constantly in certain
American tribes that it has been named the “Inca bone.”[5]

In many savage tribes there are artificial deformations of the skull,
which render it useless as a means of comparison. The “Flathead
Indians” are an example, and many Peruvian skulls are thus pressed
out of shape. It is singular that this violence to such an important
organ does not seem to be attended with any injurious result on the
intellectual powers.

The orbit of the eyes is another feature which varies in races. The
proportion of the short to the long diameter furnishes what is known as
the “orbital index.” The Mongolians present nearest a circular orbit,
the proportion being sometimes 93:100; while the lowest range has been
found in skulls from ancient French cemeteries, presenting an index
of 61:100. The latter are technically called “microsemes;” the former
“megasemes,” while the mean are “mesosemes.”[6]

In a similar manner the aperture of the nostrils varies and constitutes
quite an important element of comparison known as the “nasal index.”
Where this aperture is narrow, the nose is thin and prominent; when
broad, the nose is large and flat. The former are “leptorhinian,” the
latter “platyrhinian,” while the medium size is “mesorhinian.” This
division coincides closely with that of the chief races. Almost all
the white race are leptorhinian, the negroes platyrhinian, the true
Asiatics mesorhinian. The Eskimos have the narrowest nasal aperture,
the Bushmen the widest.

The projection of the maxillaries, or upper and lower jaws, beyond
the line of the face, is a highly significant trait. When well marked
it forms the “prognathic,” when slight the “orthognathic” type. It is
much more observable in the black than in the white race, and is more
pronounced in the old than in the young. It is considered to correspond
to a stronger development of the merely animal instincts.

The relation of the lower to the upper part of the head is measured
mainly by two angles, the one the “maxillary,” the other the “facial”
angle. The former is the angle subtended by lines drawn from the most
projecting portion of the maxillaries to the most prominent points
of the forehead above and the chin below. (The angle M G S in the
accompanying diagram, Fig. 4.) This supplies data for two important
elements, the prognathism and the prominence of the chin. The latter
is an essential feature of man. None of the lower animals possesses a
true chin, while man is never without one. The more acute the maxillary
angle, the less of chin is there, and the more prognathic the subject.
The averages run as follows:

  The European white        160°.
  The African negro         140°.
  The Orang-outang          110°.

[Illustration: Fig. 4.--Lines and angles of skull measurement.]

The facial angle is that subtended by the same line, from the most
prominent point of the upper jaw to the most prominent part of the
forehead, and a second line drawn horizontally through the center
of the aperture of the ear. (The lines M G, D N.) It expresses the
relative prominence of the forehead and capacity of the anterior
portion of the brain. The more acute this angle, the lower is the
brain capacity. The following are its averages:

  The European white      80°.
  The African negro       70°. to 75°.
  The Orang-outang        40°.

The amount of brain matter contained in a skull is called its “cerebral
or cranial capacity.” This is proved by investigation to average less
in the dark than in the light races, and in the same race less in
the female than in the male sex. Estimated in cubic centimetres the
extremes are about 1250 cub. cent. in the Australians and Bushmen to
1600 cub. cent. in well-developed Europeans. We cannot regard this
measurement as a constant exponent of intellectual power, as many men
with small brains have possessed fine intellects; but as a general
feature it certainly is indicative of brain weight, and therefore of
relative intelligence. The average human brain weighs 48 ounces, while
that of a large gorilla is not over 20 ounces.

The _teeth_ offer several points of difference in races. In the negro
they are unusually white and strong, and in nearly all the black
people (Australians, Soudanese, Melanesians, etc.), the “wisdom teeth”
are generally furnished with three separate fangs, and are sound,
while among whites they have only two fangs, and decay early. The
most ancient jaws exhumed in Europe present the former character. The
prominence of the canine teeth is a peculiarity of some tribes, while
in others the canines are not conical, but resemble the incisors.

The _size_ of the teeth has also been asserted to be an index of race,
and an effort has been made to classify peoples into small-toothed
(microdonts), medium-toothed (mesodonts), and large-toothed
(megadonts).[7] But this scheme includes in the first mentioned class
the Polynesians with the Europeans, and in the second the African negro
with the Chinese, which looks as if the plan has little value.

The milk-teeth have a much closer resemblance to those of the apes than
the second dentition, and some naturalists have thought that the forms
of the second teeth point often to reversion and are characteristic of
races, but this has not been proved.

The teeth and the period of dentition have been studied in man with
the view to show that certain races more than others retain the dental
forms of the lower animals, but the latest investigations go rather to
overthrow than to support these theories.[8]

Turning to the other bones of the skeleton, I shall note a few
peculiarities said to be ethnic. The skeleton of a negro usually
presents iliac bones more vertical than those of a white man, and the
basin is narrower. This peculiarity is measured by what is called the
“pelvic index,” by which is meant the ratio of the transverse to the
longitudinal diameter. The average ratio is about 90 or 95 to 100.

Another trait of a lower osteology is the unusual length of the arms.
This is found to depend upon the relative elongation of the fore-arm
and its principal bones, the radius and ulna. From comparisons which
have been instituted between the negro and the white, it appears that
the proportionate length of their arms is as 78 to 72. The long arms
are characteristic of the higher apes and the unripe fetus, and belong,
therefore, to a lower phase of development than that reached by the
white race.

There is also a peculiarity among many lower peoples in the shape of
the shin-bone or tibia. Usually when cut in cross-section, the ends
present a triangular surface; but in certain tribes, and in some
ancient remains from the caves, the cross-section is elliptical,
showing that the tibia has been flattened (platycnemic). This was long
regarded as a sign of ethnic inferiority, but of late years the opinion
of anatomists has undergone a change, and they attribute it to the
special use of some of the muscles of the leg.

The heel-bone, the os calcis or calcaneum, is currently believed to
be longer and project further backward in the negro than in the white
man. There is no doubt of the projection of the heel, and it is typical
of the true negro race, but it does not seem to be owing to the size
of the bone, as an examination of a series of calcanca in both races
proves. The lengthening is apparent only, and is due to the smallness
of the calf and the slenderness of the main tendon, the “tendon of
Achilles,” immediately above the heel.[9]

With the pithecoid forms of the bones is often associated another
simian mark. The line in the hand known to chiromancy as the “heart”
line, in all races but the negro ceases at the base of the middle
finger, but in his race, as in the ape, it often extends quite across
the palm.

The bones offer the most enduring, but not the most obvious
distinctions of races. The latter are unquestionably those presented by

_The Color._--This it is which first strikes the eye, and from which
the most familiar names of the types have been drawn. The black and
white, the yellow, the red and the brown races, are terms far older
than the science of ethnography, and have always been employed in its
terminology.

Why it is that these different hues should indelibly mark whole races,
is not entirely explained. The pigment or coloring matter of the skin
is deposited from the capillaries on the surface of the dermis or true
skin, and beneath the epidermis or scarf skin.[10] I have seen a negro
so badly scalded that the latter was detached in large fragments, and
with it came most of his color, leaving the spot a dirty light brown.

The coloration of the negro, however, extends much beyond the skin. It
is found in a less degree on all his mucous membrane, in his muscles,
and even in the pia mater and the grey substance of his brain.

The effort has been made to measure the colors of different peoples by
a color scale. One such was devised by Broca, presenting over thirty
shades, and another by Dr. Radde, in Germany; but on long journeys, or
as furnished by different manufacturers, these scales undergo changes
in the shades, so that they have not proved of the value anticipated.

As to the physiological cause of color, you know that the direct action
of the sun on the skin is to stimulate the capillary action, and lead
to an increased deposit of pigment, which we call “tan.” This pigment
is largely carbon, a chemical element, principally excreted by the
lungs in the form of carbonic oxide. When from any cause, such as a
peculiar diet, or a congenital disproportion of lungs to liver, the
carbonic oxide is less rapidly thrown off by the former organs, there
will be an increased tendency to pigmentary deposit on the skin. This
is visibly the fact in the African blacks, whose livers are larger in
proportion to their lungs than in any other race.[11]

While all the truly black tribes dwell in or near the tropics, all
the arctic dwellers are dark, as the Lapps, Samoyeds and Eskimos;
therefore, it is not climate alone which has to do with the change. The
Americans differ little in color among themselves from what part soever
of the continent they come, and the Mongolians, though many have lived
time immemorial in the cold and temperate zone, are never really white
when of unmixed descent.

A practical scale for the colors of the skin is the following:

          {1. Black.
  Dark.   {2. Dark brown, reddish undertone.
          {3. Dark brown, yellowish undertone.

          {1. Reddish.
  Medium. {
          {2. Yellowish (olive).

          {1. White, brown undertone (grayish).
  White.  {2.   “    yellow undertone.
          {3.   “    rosy undertone.

The color of the _eyes_ should next have attention. Their hue is very
characteristic of races and of families. Light eyes with dark skins are
rare exceptions. Other things equal, they are lighter in men than in
women. Extensive statistics have been collected in Europe to ascertain
the prevalence of certain colors, and instructive results have been
obtained.[12] The division usually adopted is into dark and light eyes.

              {1. Black.
  Dark eyes.  {
              {2. Brown.

              {1. Light brown (hazel).
  Light eyes. {2. Gray.
              {3. Blue.

The eye must be examined at some little distance so as to catch the
total effect.

Next in the order of prominence is

_The Hair._--Indeed, Haeckel and others have based upon its character
the main divisions of mankind. That of some races is straight, of
others more or less curled. This difference depends upon the shape
of the hairs in cross-section. The more closely they assimilate true
cylinders, the straighter they hang; while the flatter they are, the
more they approach the appearance of wool. (Fig. 5.) The variation
of the two diameters (transverse and longitudinal) is from 25:100 to
90:100. The straightest is found among the Malayans and Mongolians; the
wooliest among the Hottentots, Papuas and African negroes. The white
race is intermediate, with curly or wavy hair. It is noteworthy that
all woolly-haired peoples have also long, narrow heads and protruding
jaws.

[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Cross Sections of Hairs.]

The amount of hair on the face and body is also a point of some
moment. As a rule, the American and Mongolian peoples have little,
the Europeans and Australians abundance. Crossing of races seems to
strengthen its growth, and the Ainos of the Japanese Archipelago, a
mixed people, are probably the hairiest of the species. The strongest
growth on the head is seen among the Cafusos of Brazil, a hybrid of the
Indian and negro.

_The Muscular Structure._--The development of the muscular structure
offers notable differences in the various races. The blacks, both in
Africa and elsewhere, have the gastrocnemii or calf muscles of the
leg very slightly developed; while in both them and the Mongolians
the facial muscles have their fibres more closely interwoven than the
whites, thus preventing an equal mobility of facial expression.

The anomalies of the muscular structure seem about as frequent in one
race as in another. The most of them are regressive, imitating the
muscles of the apes, monkeys, and lower mammals. Indeed, a learned
anatomist has said that the abnormal anatomy of the muscles supplies
all the gaps which separate man from the higher apes, as all the simian
characteristics reappear from time to time in his structure.[13]

Certain motions or positions, such as I may call “muscular habits,” are
characteristic of extensive groups of tribes. The method of resting is
one such. The Japanese squats on his hams, the Australian stands on one
leg, supporting himself by a spear or pole, and so on. The methods of
arrow-release have been profitably studied by Professor E. S. Morse. He
finds them so characteristic that he classifies them ethnographically,
with reference to savagery and civilization, and locality. The three
most important are the primary, the Mediterranean, and the Mongolian
releases. The first is that of many savage tribes, the second was
practiced principally by the white race, the last by the Mongolians and
their neighbors. (Figs. 6, 7, 8.) The last two are the most effective,
and thus gave superiority in combat.

[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Primary Arrow-Release.]

[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Mediterranean Arrow-Release.]

Allied to muscular variation are the peculiar deposits of fatty tissue
in certain portions of the system. The Hottentots are remarkable for
the prominence of the gluteal region, imparting to their figure a
singular projection posteriorly. It is called “steatopygy,” and appears
to have been, in part at least, a cultivated deformity, regarded
among them as a beauty. The thick lips of the negro, and the long and
pendent breasts of the Australian women, are other examples of ethnic
hypertrophies.

[Illustration: Fig. 8.--Mongolian Arrow-Release.]

_Stature and Proportion._--Differences in stature are tribal, but not
racial. The smallest peoples known, the Negrillos, the Aetas, the
Lapps, belong to different races, as do the tallest, the Patagonians,
the Polynesians, the Anglo-Americans. The researches of Paolo Riccardi
and others prove that stature is correlated with nutrition; the better
the food, other things being equal, the taller the men.[14] It is also
markedly hereditary; the stature of children will average that of their
parents.

What is called the “canon of proportions” of the human body varies
with the race and the nation. There is indeed an ideal, an artistic
canon, which the sculptor or the painter seeks to body forth in his
productions; and this seems in close conformity with an extensive
average of the proportions of the highest peoples; but it is never
found in individuals, and it is essentially unlike in man and woman,
in youth and age, in the blonde and brunette.[15] Nor is the ideal of
the artist also that which is consonant with the greatest muscular
development or highest powers of endurance.

_Special Senses._--It cannot be said that the different races display
positive discrepancies in the special senses. Their development appears
to depend on cultivation, and all races respond equally to equal
training. There is, to be sure, a higher musical sense in the native
African than in the native American, but quite as much difference is
seen between European nations.

Much has been written of the color-sense as a trait of nations. It has
been said that some tribes, some races, appreciate hues more keenly
than others; that within historic times marked gains in this respect
are noticeable. I think these statements are incorrect. The savage of
any race distinguishes precisely the difference of hues when it is to
his material interest so to do; but concerns himself not at all about
colors which have no effect on his life. He is well acquainted with
the colors of the animals he hunts, and has a word for every shade of
hue. This proves that his color-sense is as acute as that of civilized
people, and merely lacks specific training.

_Ethnic Relations of the Sexes._--There are some curious facts in
reference to the relative position of the sexes in different peoples.
As a rule the expression of sex in form and feature is less in the
lower than in the higher races. Travelers frequently refer to the
difficulty of distinguishing the men from the women among the American
Indians or the Chinese. Investigate the fact, and you will find that
it is not that the women are less feminine in appearance, but the men
less masculine. In other words, the expression of sex in such peoples
is less in man than in woman. This seems to be true also of the
highest ideals of manhood in artistic conception. The Greek Apollo,
the traditional Christ, present a feminine type of the male. This was
carried to its excess in the Greek Hermaphrodite.

The reason for this approximation to the female in art-ideals is
probably the zoological fact that the law of beauty in the human
species is the reverse of that in all the other higher mammals, the
female sex with us being the handsomer. This also becomes more evident
in the comparison of the best developed peoples.

On the other hand, the muscular force of the sexes presents the
greatest contrast in nations of the highest culture. The average
European woman of twenty-five or thirty has one-third less muscular
power than the average European man. But among the Afghans, the
Patagonians, the Druses and other tribes, the women are as tall and as
strong as the men; and in Siam, Ashanti, Ancient Gaul, and elsewhere,
not only the field-laborers but the soldiers were principally women,
selected because of their greater physical force and courage.

As the value of mere brute force in a social organization lessens in
comparison to mental powers, the condition of woman improves, and her
faculties find appropriate play. Her brain capacity, though absolutely
less, is relatively more than man’s. That is, the difference of the
whole average weight of woman and man is greater in proportion than the
difference of their brain weights.

It is believed, also, that the viability or prospect of life in woman
is greater in higher than in lower peoples; and generally greater than
in men. European statistics show that 106 boys are born to 100 girls:
but at twelve years of age the sexes are equal, the boys suffering a
greater mortality. At eighty years of age, there are nearly three women
living to one man, indicating a superior longevity.

_Correlation of Physical Traits to Vital Powers._--The physical
traits are correlated to the physiological functions in such a manner
as profoundly to influence the destiny of nations. They enable or
disable man with reference to the climatic and other conditions of his
surroundings. For instance, certain races can support given temperature
better than others. The intense heat and humidity of Central Africa or
Southern India are destructive to the pure whites, while the climate
north of the fortieth parallel soon exterminates the blacks. The food
on which the Australian thrives destroys the digestive powers of
the European. Exemption and liability to diseases differ noticeably
in races. The white race is more liable to yellow fever, malarial
diseases, syphilis, scarlet fever and sunstroke; the colored races to
measles, tuberculosis, leprosy, elephantiasis, and pneumonia.

Indeed, from the physical point of view, the pure white is weaker
than the dark races, worse prepared for the combat of life, with
inferior viability. This has been shown by the careful researches of
statisticians.[16] But in the white this is more than compensated by
the development of the nervous system and the intellectual power. He
can bear greater mental strain than any other race, and the activity
of his mind supplies him with means to overcome the inferiority of his
body, and thus places him at the head of the whole species.

The _tolerance of disease_ is an obscure but momentous element in the
comparison of races. It is almost a proverb among the Spanish-American
physicians that “when an Indian falls sick, he dies.” The greater
longevity of the European peoples is due to their ability to support
disease long and frequently, without succumbing to it. On the other
hand, surgical injuries, wounds and cuts, appear to heal more rapidly
among savage peoples.[17] It is clear that in civilized conditions this
is less important than tolerance.

_The Causes of the Fixation of Ethnic Traits._--These causes are
mainly related to climate and the food-supply. The former embraces the
questions of temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure (altitude),
malarial or zymotic poisons, and the like. All these bear directly upon
the relative activity of the great physiological organs, the lungs,
heart, liver, skin and kidneys, and to their action we must undoubtedly
turn for the origin of the traits I have named. On the food-supply,
liquid and solid, whether mainly animal, fish or vegetable, whether
abundant or scanty, whether rich in phosphates and nitrogenous
constituents or the reverse, depend the condition of the digestive
organs, the nutrition of the individual, and the development of
numerous physical idiosyncrasies. Nutrition controls the direction of
organic development, and it is essentially on arrested or imperfect, in
contrast to completed development, that the differences of races depend.

These are the physiological and generally unavoidable influences which
went to the fixation of racial types. They are those which placed early
man under the dominion of natural, unconscious evolution, like all the
lower animals. To them may be added natural selection from accidental
variations becoming permanent when proving of value in the struggle
for existence, as shown in the black hue of equatorial tribes, special
muscular development, etc.

But I do not look on these as the main agents in the fixation of
special traits. No doubt such agencies primarily evolved them, but
their cultivation and perpetuation were distinctly owing to _conscious_
selection in early man. Our species is largely outside the general laws
of organic evolution, and that by virtue of the self-consciousness
which is the privilege of it alone among organized beings.

This conscious selection was applied in two most potent directions,
the one to maintaining the _physical ideal_, the other toward _sexual
preference_.

As soon as the purely physical influences mentioned had impressed
a tendency toward a certain type on the early community, this was
recognized, cultivated and deepened by man’s conscious endeavors. Every
race, when free from external influence, assigns to its highest ideal
of manly or womanly beauty its special racial traits, and seeks to
develop these to the utmost. African travelers tell us that the negroes
of the Soudan look with loathing on the white skin of the European;
and in ancient Mexico when children were born of a very light color,
as occasionally happened, they were put to death. On the other hand
the earliest records of the white race exalt especially the element of
whiteness. The writer of the Song of Solomon celebrates his bride as
“fairest among women,” with a neck “like a tower of ivory;”[18] and one
of the oldest of Irish hero-tales, the _Wooing of Emer_, chants the
praises of “Tara, the whitest of maidens.”[19] Though both Greeks and
Egyptians were of the dark type of the Mediterranean peoples, their
noblest gods, Apollo and Osiris, were represented “fair in hue, and
with light or golden hair.”[20]

The persistent admiration of an ideal leads to its constant cultivation
by careful preservation and sexual selection. Thus the peoples who have
little hair on the face and body, as most Chinese and American Indians,
usually do not like any, and carefully extirpate it. The negroes prefer
a flat nose, and a child which develops one of a pointed type has it
artificially flattened. In Melanesia if a child is born of a lighter
hue than is approved by the village, it is assiduously held over the
smoke of a fire in order to blacken it. The custom of destroying
infants markedly aberrant from the national type is nigh universal in
primitive life. Such usages served to fix and perpetuate the racial
traits.

A yet more powerful factor was _sexual preference_. This worked in a
variety of ways. If is well known to stock breeders that the closer
animals are bred in-and-in, that is, the nearer the relationship of
father and mother, the more prominently the traits of the parents
appear in their children and become fixed in the breed. It is
evident that in the earliest epoch of the human family, the closest
inter-breeding must have prevailed without restriction, as it does in
every species of the lower animals. By its influences the racial traits
were rapidly strengthened and indelibly impressed. This, however, was
long before the dawn of history, for it is a most remarkable fact that
never in historic times has a tribe been known that allowed incestuous
relations, unless as in ancient Egypt and Persia, for a sacrificial or
ceremonial purpose. The lowest Australians, the degraded Utes, look
with horror on the union of brother and sister. The general principle
of marriage in savage races is that of “exogamy,” marriage outside
the clan or family, the latter being counted in the female line only.
This strange but universal abhorrence has been explained by Darwin as
primarily the result of sexual indifference arising between members
of the same household, and the high zest of novelty in that appetite.
Whatever the cause, the consequences will easily be seen. The racial
traits once fixed in the period before this abhorrence arose would
remain largely stationary afterwards, and by exogamous marriages would
be rendered uniform over a wide area.

This form of conscious selection has properly been rated as one of
the prime factors in the problem of race differentiation.[21] The
apparently miscellaneous and violent union of the sexes in savage
tribes is in fact governed by the most stringent traditional laws, and
their confused cohabitations are so only to the mind of the European
observer, not to the tribal conscience.[22]

_Causes of Variation in Types._--The physical type once fixed by the
influences just mentioned remains very stable; yet may fall under the
influence of conditions which will greatly modify it.

Changes in climatic surroundings and of the food supply exert a visible
effect. These generally come about by migration, though geologic action
has occasionally completely altered the climate of a given locality,
as at the glacial epoch, which change would have the same effect as
migration.

How far migration may alter race-types after many generations is not
yet defined. The Spanish-American of pure white blood, whose ancestors
have lived for three centuries in tropical America, the citizen of
the United States who traces his genealogy to the passengers in the
Mayflower or the Welcome, have departed extremely little from the
standard of the Andalusian or the Englishman of to-day, though the
contrary is often asserted by those who have not personally studied
the variants in the countries compared. Conditions of climate and food
materially impress the individual, but not the race. The Greeks of
Nubia are as dark as Nubians, but let their children return to Greece
and the Nubian hue is lost. This is a general truth and holds good
of all the slight impressions made upon pure races by unaccustomed
environments.

Another cause of variation is the recurrence to remote ancestral
traits, or the appearance of what seem merely accidental variations,
which may be perpetuated. It is not very unusual in pure African
negroes and Chinese to observe instances of reddish hair and gray or
brown eyes.

Those peculiar congenital conditions known as _albinism_ and _melanism_
may be frequent and are unquestionably transmissible by descent.[23]

_The Mingling of Races._--But the mightiest cause in the change of
types is intermarriage between races, what the French call _métissage_.
This has taken place from distantly remote epochs, especially along the
lines where two races come into contact. In such regions we always
find numerous mixed breeds, leading to a shading of one race into
another by imperceptible degrees.

The widespread custom of exogamous marriage fostered the blending of
types, and it was greatly increased in early days by the institution of
human slavery, the habit of selling captives taken in war, the purchase
of wives and concubines, and the rule in early conquest that the men of
the conquered were killed or sent off, and the women retained as the
spoils of the victors. In all ages man has been migratory, and very
remote relics of his arts show that war and commerce led to extensive
intermixture of races long before history took up the thread of his
wanderings.

It is noticeable, however, that these prolonged interminglings have
not produced another race. The nearest approach to it is in the
Australians, but these do not refute my statement as we shall see
later. Many ethnologists have indeed classed the mixed types as
separate races, running the number of the sub-species of the genus
_homo_ up to thirty or forty. But this was hasty generalization.

I would impress upon you this fact, that since the intermingling of
two races _does not produce a third race_, it is not likely that any
of the existing races arose from a fusion of two others. The result of
observation shows that after two or three generations the tendency in
mixed breeds is to recur to one or the other of the original stocks,
not to establish a different variety.

Were it not for such constant crossings, we have reason to believe that
the race types would resist all environment and retain their traits
under all known conditions. It is only where the element of _métissage_
prominently enters that we are unable to assign individuals to one or
another race.

Such being the case, it is a fair comparison to set one race over
against another and deduce the

_Physical Criteria of Racial Superiority._--We are accustomed
familiarly to speak of “higher” and “lower” races, and we are justified
in this even from merely physical considerations. These indeed bear
intimate relations to mental capacity, and where the body presents many
points of arrested or retarded development, we may be sure that the
mind will also.

There are two explanations of the presence of the inferior physical
traits in certain races of men; the one, that of the evolutionists,
that they are reversions or perpetuations of the ape-like (simian,
pithecoid) features of the lower animal which was man’s immediate
ancestor; the other, that of the special creationists, that they are
instances of surviving fetal peculiarities, or else deficiency or
excess of development from unknown causes.

The following are the principal traits of the kind:

Simplicity and early union of cranial sutures.

Presence of the frontal process of the temporal bone.

Wide nasal aperture, with synostosis of the nasal bones.

Prominence of the jaws.

Recession of the chin.

Early appearance, size and permanence of the “wisdom” teeth.

Unusual length of the humerus.

Perforation of the humerus.

Continuation of the “heart” line across the hand.

Obliquity (narrowness) of the pelvis.

Deficiency of the calf of the leg.

Flattening of the tibia.

Elongation of the heel (os calcis).

When all or many of these traits are present, the individual approaches
physically the type of the anthropoid apes, and a race presenting many
of them is properly called a “lower” race. On the other hand, where
they are not present, the race is “higher,” as it maintains in their
integrity the special traits of the genus Man, and is true to the type
of the species.

The adult who retains the more numerous fetal, infantile or simian
traits, is unquestionably inferior to him whose development has
progressed beyond them, nearer to the ideal form of the species, as
revealed by a study of the symmetry of the parts of the body, and their
relation to the erect stature.

Measured by these criteria, the European or white race stands at the
head of the list, the African or negro at its foot.

The investigations of anthropologists extend much beyond the outlines
I have now presented you. All parts of the body have been minutely
scanned, measured and weighed, in order to erect a science of the
comparative anatomy of the races. Much of value has been discovered;
but nothing absolutely characteristic, nothing which enables us to
divide more sharply one race from another than the facts I have given
you. It is a question, indeed, whether not too much, but too exclusive
attention has not been devoted by many anthropologists to the purely
physical aspects of their science. They have multiplied useless
anatomical refinements and a pedantic nomenclature. The more valuable
general distinctions and their technical terms I present to you in the
following table:--


_Scheme of Principal Physical Elements._

         {Dolichocephalic, long skulls.
   Skull {Mesocephalic,    medium skulls.
         {Brachycephalic,  broad skulls.

         {Leptorhine, narrow noses.
    Nose {Mesorhine,  medium noses.
         {Platyrhine, flat or broad noses.

         {Megaseme,  round eyes.
    Eyes {Mesoseme,  medium eyes.
         {Microseme, narrow eyes.

         {Orthognathic, straight or vertical jaws.
    Jaws {Mesognathic,  medium jaws.
         {Prognathic,   projecting jaws.

         {Chamæprosopic, low or broad face.
    Face {Mesoprosopic,  medium face.
         {Leptoprosopic, narrow or high face.

         {Platypellic, broad pelvis.
  Pelvis {Mesopellic,  medium pelvis.
         {Leptopellic, narrow pelvis.
         {Leucochroic, white skin.
         {Xanthochroic, yellow skin.
  Color  {Erythrochroic, reddish skin.
         {Melanochroic, black or dark skin.

         {Euthycomic, straight hair.
         {Euplocomic, wavy hair.
  Hair   {Eriocomic, wooly hair.
         {Lophocomic, bushy hair.



LECTURE II.

THE PSYCHICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY.

    CONTENTS.--The mental differences of races. Ethnic psychology.
    Cause of psychical development.

    I. THE ASSOCIATIVE ELEMENTS. 1. The Social Instincts; sexual
    impulse; primitive marriage; conception of love; parental
    affection; filial and fraternal affection; friendship; ancestral
    worship; the gens or clan; the tribe; personal loyalty; the social
    organization; systems of consanguinity; position of woman in the
    state; ethical standards; modesty. 2. Language; universality
    of; primeval speech; rise of linguistic stocks; their number;
    grammatical structure; classes of languages; morphologic scheme;
    relation of language to thought; significance of language in
    ethnography. 3. Religion: universality of; early forms; family
    and tribal religions; universal or world religions; ethnic study
    of religions; comparison of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism;
    material and ideal religions; associative influences of religions.
    4. The Arts of Life: architecture; agriculture; domestication of
    animals; inventions.

    II. THE DISPERSIVE ELEMENTS: adaptability of man to surroundings.
    1. The Migratory Instincts; love of roaming; early commerce;
    lines of traffic and migration. 2. The Combative Instincts:
    primitive condition of war; love of combat; its advantages; heroes;
    development through conflict.


The mental differences of races and nations are real and profound.
Some of them are just as valuable for ethnic classification as any
of the physical elements I referred to in the last lecture, although
purely physical anthropologists are loath to admit this. No one can
deny, however, that it is the psychical endowment of a tribe or a
people which decides fatally its luck in the fight of the world. Those,
therefore, who would master the highest significance of ethnography in
its function as the key to history, will devote to this branch of it
their most earnest attention.

The study of the general mental peculiarities of a people is called
“ethnic psychology.” As a science, it may be treated by various
methods, applicable to the different aims of research. For our present
purpose, which is to study the growth, migrations and comminglings of
races and peoples, the most suggestive method will be to classify their
mental distinctions under the two main headings of Associative and
Dispersive Elements. The predominance of one or the other of these is
ever eminently formative in the character and history of a people, and
both must be constantly considered with reference to their bearings on
the progress of a nation toward civilization.

The psychical development of men and nations finds its chief
explanation, less in the natural surroundings, the climate, soil,
and water-currents, as is taught by some philosophers, than in
their relations and connections with each other, their friendships,
federations and enmities, their intercourse in commerce, love and war.
Around these must center the chief studies of ethnographic science, for
they contain and present the means for reaching its highest, almost its
only aim--the comprehension of the social and intellectual progress of
the species.


I. THE ASSOCIATIVE ELEMENTS.

The sense of fellowship, the gregarious instinct, was inherited by our
first fathers from their anthropoid ancestors. The “river drift” men,
who dwelt on the banks of the Thames and the Somme before the glacial
epoch, were gathered into small communities, as their remains testify.
The most savage tribes, Fuegians and Australians, roam about in
detached bands. They are not under the control of a chief, but are led
to such union by much the same motives as prompt buffaloes to gather in
a herd.

These fundamental mental elements which impel to association are:


_1. The Social Instincts._

Strongest of them all is _the sexual impulse_. The foundation of every
community is the bond of the man and woman, and the nature of this bond
is the surest test of a community’s position in the scale of culture.
It is not likely that miscellaneous cohabitation, or that slightly
modified form of it called “communal marriage,” ever existed. No
instance of it has been known to history.[24] In the most brutal tribes
the man asserts his right of ownership in the woman. The rare custom of
“polyandry,” where a woman has several husbands at once, gives her no
general license.

It is equally true that the tender sentiments of love appear to be
less known to the lowest savages than they are to beasts and birds. The
process of mating is by brute force, marriage is by robbery, and the
women are in a wretched slavery. Mutual affection has no existence.
Such is the state of affairs among the Australians, the western
Eskimos, the Athapascas, the Mosquitos, and many other tribes.[25]

But it is gratifying to find that we have to mount but a step higher
in the scale to find the germs of a nobler understanding of the sex
relation. In many tribes of but moderate culture, their languages
supply us with evidence that the sentiment of love was awake among
them, and this is corroborated by the incidents we learn of their
domestic life. This I have shown in considerable detail by an analysis
of the words for love and affection in the languages of the Algonkins,
Nahuas, Mayas, Qquichuas, Tupis and Guaranis, all prominent tribes of
the American Indians.[26]

Some of the songs and stories of this race seem to reveal even a
capability for romantic love, such as would do credit to a modern
novel. This is the more astonishing, as in the African and Mongolian
races this ethereal sentiment is practically absent, the idealism of
passion being something foreign to those varieties of man.

The sequel of the sexual impulse is the formation of the family through
the development of _parental affection_. This instinct is as strong in
many of the lower animals as in human beings. In primitive conditions
it is largely confined to the female parent, the father paying but
slight attention to the welfare of his offspring. To this, rather than
to a doubt of paternity, should we attribute the very common habit in
such communities, of reckoning ancestry in the female line only.

Akin to this is _filial_ and _fraternal_ affection, leading to a
preservation of the family bond through generations, and in spite of
local separation. It is surprising how strong is this sentiment even in
conditions of low culture. The Polynesians preserved their genealogies
through twenty generations; the Haidah Indians of Vancouver’s Island
boast of fifteen or eighteen.

The sentiment of _friendship_ has been supposed by some to be an
acquisition of higher culture. Nothing is more erroneous. Dr. Carl
Lumholtz tells me he has seen touching examples of it among Australian
cannibals, and the records of travelers are full of instances of
devoted affection in members of savage tribes, both toward each other
and toward persons of other races. There are established rites in
early social conditions, by which a stranger is received into the
bond of fellowship and the sanctity of friendship.[27] This is often
by a transfer of the blood of the one to the body of the other,
or a symbolic ceremony to that effect, the meaning being that the
stranger is thus admitted to the rights of kinship in the gens or clan.
Springing from this clannish affection is the custom of _ancestral
worship_, which adds a link to the bond of the family. It is so widely
spread that Herbert Spencer has endeavored to derive from it all other
forms of religion. But this is a hasty generalization. The religious
sentiment had many other primitive forms of expression.

Through these various personal affections we reach the development of
the family into the _gens_, the clan or _totem_, all of whose members,
whether by consanguinity or adoption, are held to represent one
interest.

The union of several gentes under one control constitutes the _tribe_,
which is the first step toward what is properly a _state_. The tribe
passes beyond the ties of affinity by embracing in certain common
interests persons who are not recognized as allied in blood. Yet it
is curious to note that the tribal sentiments are among the very
strongest mankind ever exhibits, surpassing those of family affection.
Brutus felt no hesitation in sacrificing his son for the common weal.
Classical antiquity is full of admonitions and examples to the same
effect. So powerful is the devotion of the Polynesians that they have
been known when a canoe was capsized where sharks abounded, to form a
ring around their chief, and sacrifice themselves one by one to the
ravenous fish, that he might escape.

This sentiment of _personal loyalty_ has been in history the main
strength of many a government, and has in it something chivalric and
noble, which challenges our admiration; yet it is quite opposed to the
principles of republicanism and the equal rights of individuals, and we
must condemn it as belonging to a lower stage of evolution than that to
which we have arrived.

The result of these gregarious instincts is the formation of the
_social organization_, the bond under which first the primitive
horde and later the members of the developed commonwealth consented
to live. From first to last, wherever found, communities of men are
bound together by ties of consanguinity and affection rather than mere
self-interest. Those writers who pretend that society once existed
without the idea of kinship, with promiscuity in the sexual relation,
and without some recognized controlling power, have failed to produce
such an example from actual life.

These ties led to the systems of “consanguinity and affinity” which
recur with singular sameness at a certain stage of culture the world
over. They give rise to what is called the totemic or gentile phase of
society, in which its members are organized into “gentes” or clans,
“phratries” or associations of clans, and the tribe, which embraces
several such phratries. This theory affected the disposition of
property, which belonged to the clan and not to the individual, and the
form of government, which was usually by a council appointed from the
various clans. The recognition of the wide prevalence of these ideas
in the ancient world has led to profound modifications of our views
respecting its institutions, and a better understanding of many of the
events of history.[28]

In social organizations one of the criteria of excellence is the
_position of woman_. Upon this depends the life of the family and
the development of morality. Those nations which have gained the
most enduring conquests in power and culture have conceded to woman
a prominent place in social life. In ancient Egypt, in Etruria, in
republican Rome, women owned property, and enjoyed equal rights
under the law. Where woman is enslaved, as among the Australian
tribes, progress is scarcely possible; where she is imprisoned, as in
Mohammedan countries, progress may be rapid for a time, but is not
permanent. Unusual mental ability in a man is generally inherited from
his mother, and a nation which studies to prevent women from acquiring
an education and from taking an active part in affairs, is preparing
the way to engender citizens of inferior minds.

Among other ethnic traits, the appreciation of the _ethical_ standard
differs notably. Long ago the observant Montaigne commented on the
conflicting views of morals in nations, and remarked rather cynically
that what was good on one side of a river was deemed wicked on the
other. This is especially noticeable in the sense of justice, the
rights of property, and the regard for truth. No Asiatic nation
respects truth telling, or can be made to see that it is abstractly
desirable when it conflicts with their immediate interests. The rights
of property are generally construed entirely differently to ourselves
among nations in the lower grades of culture, because the idea of
independent personal ownership does not exist among them. What they
have belongs to the clan or the horde, and they merely have the use of
it.

The basis of ethics in all undeveloped conditions is not general but
special; it relates to the tribe and the family, and is in direct
conflict with the philosopher Kant’s famous “categorical imperative,”
which makes the basis the welfare of the whole species. Hence, in
primitive culture and survivals there is a dual system of morals, the
one of kindness, love, help and peace, applicable to the members of
our own clan, tribe or community; the other of robbery, hatred, enmity
and murder, to be practiced against all the rest of the world; and the
latter is regarded as quite as much a sacred duty as the former.[29]
Ethics, therefore, while a powerfully associative element in the one
direction, becomes dispersive or segregating in others, unless the
sense of duty is taught as a universal and not as a class or national
conception.

The sentiment of _modesty_ is developed by man in society, and he
alone among animals possesses it. Whatever has been said to the
contrary, it is never absent. Frequently, indeed, its manifestation
is not according to our usages, and is thus overlooked. Women with us
expose their faces, which a Moorish lady would think most indelicate.
The Bedawin women consider it immodest to have the back of the head
uncovered; the Siamese think nothing of displaying nude limbs, but
on no account would show the uncovered sole of the foot. In certain
African courts, the men wear long robes while the women appear
nude. The necessary functions of the body are everywhere veiled by
retirement, and in the most savage tribes, a regard for decency is
constantly noted.

The second chief associative principle is


_2. Language._

Unlike the elements of affection which I have been tracing, language
is not a legacy from a brute ancestor. It is the peculiar property of
the genus Man, and no tribe has ever been known without a developed
grammatical articulate speech, with abundance of expressions for
all its ideas. The stories of savages so rude that they were forced
to eke out their words with gestures, and could not make themselves
intelligible in the dark, are fables. The languages of the most
barbarous communities are always ample in forms, and often surprisingly
flexible, rich and sonorous.

We must indeed suppose a time when the speech of primeval man had
a feeble, imperfect beginning. “The origin of language” has been a
favorite theme for philologists to speculate about, with sparse fruit
for their readers. We can, indeed, picture to ourselves something
like what it must have been in its very early stages, by studying a
number of very simple languages, and noting what parts of the grammar
and dictionary they dispense with. Following this plan, I once
undertook to show what might have been the language of man far back
in palæolithic times. It probably had no “parts of speech,” such as
nouns, pronouns, prepositions or adjectives; it had no gender, number
nor case, no numerals and no conjugations. The different sounds, vowels
or consonants, conveyed specific significations, and each phrase was
summed up in a single word.[30]

In some such way language began. But remember that this is quite
another question from the origin of _languages_, or, to use the proper
term, of _linguistic stocks_. They are very numerous, and many of
comparatively late birth. Those convolutions of the brain which preside
over speech once developed, man did not have to repeat his long and
toilsome task of acquiring linguistic facility. Children are always
originating new words and expressions, and if two or three infants are
left much together, they will soon have a tongue of their own, unlike
anything they hear around them. Numerous examples of this character
have been collected by Horatio Hale, and upon them he has based an
entirely satisfactory theory of the source of that multiplicity of
languages which we find in various parts of the globe.[31] In the
unstable life of barbarous epochs, very young children were often left
without parents or protectors, or wandered off and were lost. Most of
them doubtless perished, but those who survived developed a tongue of
their own, nearly all whose radicals would be totally different from
those of the language of their parents. Thus in early times numerous
dialects, numerous independent tongues, came to be spoken within
limited areas by the same ethnic stock.

It is a common error to suppose that there was once but one or a few
languages, from which all others have been derived. The reverse is the
case. Within the historic period, the number of languages has been
steadily diminishing. We know of scores which have become extinct, as
many American tongues; others, like the Celtic, are in plain process
of disappearance. We can almost predict the time when the work and
the thought of the world will be carried on in less than half a dozen
tongues, if indeed that many survive as really active.

If we take a comprehensive survey of the grammatical structure of
all known tongues, we are cheered by the discovery that they can be
divided into a few great classes or groups. The similarities of each
group are not in words or sounds, but in the plan of “expressing the
proposition,” or placing words together in a phrase to convey an idea.

This may be accomplished in one of four ways:

1. By _isolation_. The words representing the parts of the phrase may
be ranged one after another without any change. This is the case in the
Chinese and the languages of Farther India.

2. By _agglutination_. The principal word in the phrase may have
added to it or placed before it a number of syllables expressing the
relations to it of the other ideas. Most African and North Asian
tongues are agglutinative.

3. By _incorporation_. The accessory words are either inserted within
the verbal members of the sentence, or attached to it in abbreviated
forms, so that the phrase has the appearance of one word. Most American
languages belong to this type.

4. By _inflection_. Each word of the sentence indicates by its own form
its relation to the main proposition. All Aryan and Semitic idioms are
more or less inflected.

These distinctions have great ethnographic interest. They almost
deserve to be called racial traits. Thus, the inflected languages
belonged originally solely to the European race; the isolating
languages are still confined wholly to the Sinitic branch of the Asian
race; the incorporative languages are found nowhere of such pure type
and so numerous as in the American race; while the agglutinative type
is that alone which is found in independent examples in every race.


_Scheme of Languages._

  1. Isolating      { Chinese, Thibetan, Sifan, Tai.
                    { Siamese, Annamite, Burmese, Assamese.

                    { 1. By reduplication and  { Polynesian, Papuan,
                        prefixes               { Bantu.
  2. Agglutinative                     { Sibiric tongues, (Ural-altaic),
                    { 2. By suffixes   {   Basque.
                                       { Japanese, Korean, Dravidian.

                    { 1. With synthetic tendency   { Algonkin, Nahuatl.
                                                   { Quichua, Guarani.
  3. Incorporative  { 2. With analytic tendency.   { Otomi, Maya, Sahaptin.

                    { 1. By annexing grammatical elements. Egyptian.
  4. Inflectional   { 2. By inner changes of stem. Libyan, Semitic.
                    { 3. By addition of suffixes. Aryac tongues.

The principles on which languages should be compared are frequently
misunderstood, and this is one of the reasons why the value of
linguistics to ethnography has so often been underrated.

The first rule which should be observed is to _rank grammatical
structure far above verbal coincidences_. The neglect of this rule will
condemn any effort at comparison. For example, there have been writers
who have sought to derive the Polynesian, an agglutinative, from the
Sanscrit, an inflected tongue; or an American from a Semitic stock.
Such attempts reveal an ignorance of the nature of language.

A second rule is that in tracing the etymology of words, the _phonetic
laws of the special group to which they belong_ must be followed. This
is an even more frequent source of error than the former. Writers of
high reputation will trace variations in African or American or Semitic
names by the phonetic laws of the Aryac dialects--an absurd error, as
the phonetic changes are not at all the same in different linguistic
stocks.

Yet a third rule is _to appraise correctly the value of verbal
identities_. Generally, it is placed too high. All developed tongues
include many “loan words,” borrowed from a variety of sources. They are
not _prima facie_ evidence of ethnic relation; they have frequently
been transmitted through other nations, as is the case with thousands
of English words.

An absolute verbal identity is always suspicious; or rather it is of
_no_ ethnic value. There must be a series of words in the languages
compared of the same or similar meanings, but whose forms have been
altered by the phonetic laws peculiar to the group, for such lists of
words to merit the attention of a scientific linguist.

The question how far languages can be accepted as indicating the
relationships of peoples has been a bone of contention. One principle
we may lay down, with unimportant exceptions--_No nation has ever
willingly adopted a foreign tongue._ Whenever such a change has taken
place, it has been under stress of sovereignty, _vi coactum_, as the
lawyers say. Hence in the savage state, where prolonged domination of
one tribe by another rarely occurs, language is an excellent ethnic
guide, as in America and ancient Europe.

Another principle is that in a conflict of tongues, as after conquest,
_that tongue prevails which belongs to the more cultured people_,
whether this be conqueror or conquered. This is well illustrated by
the survival of the Romance languages after the inroads of the Teutonic
hordes at the Fall of the Western Empire.

A third maxim in linguistic ethnography is that _mixture of languages,
especially in grammatical structure, indicates mixture of blood_.
When, for instance, we find the Maltese a dialect partly Arabic,
partly Romance, we may correctly infer that the people of the island
are descended from both these stocks. This holds good even of loan
words, when they are numerous; for though such have no influence on
the grammatical structure of a tongue, they testify to some relations
between nations, which we may be sure corresponded to others of a
sexual nature.

The “American citizens of African descent” speak English only; and
though they have been in contact with the white race for but three or
four generations, the majority of those now living are related to it by
blood, that is, are mulattoes.

The _mental aptitude_ of a nation is closely dependent on the type of
its idiom. The mind is profoundly influenced by its current modes of
vocal expression. When the form of the phrase is such that each idea
is kept clear and apart, as it is in nature, and yet its relations
to other ideas in the phrase and the sentence are properly indicated
by the grammatical construction, the intellect is stimulated by
wider variety in images and a nicer precision in their outlines and
relations. This is the case in the highest degree with the languages
of inflection, and it is no mere coincidence that those peoples who
have ever borne the banner in the van of civilization have always
spoken inflected tongues. The world will be better off when all others
are extinguished, and it is only in deep ignorance of linguistic
ethnography that such a language as _Volapük_--agglutinative in
type--could have been offered for adoption as a world-language.

I have said that alone of all animals, man has articulate speech; I now
add that also alone of all animals, he is capable of


_3. Religion._

Not only is he capable of it; he has never been known to be devoid of
it. All statements that tribes have been discovered without any kind
of religion are erroneous. Not one of them has borne the test of close
investigation.[32] The usual mistake has been to suppose that this
or that belief, this or that moral observance, constitutes religion.
In fact, there are plenty of immoral religions, and some which are
atheistic. The notion of a God or gods is not essential to religion;
for that matter, some of the most advanced religious teachers assert
that such a notion is incompatible with the highest religion. Religion
is simply the recognition of the Unknown as a controlling element in
the destiny of man and the world about him. This we shall find in the
cult of every nation, and in the heart of every man.

Some nations identified this unknown controlling power with one real
or supposed existence, some with another. Those in whom the family
sentiment was well developed believed themselves still under the
control of their deceased parents, giving rise to “ancestral worship;”
more frequently the change from light to darkness, day to night,
impressed the children of nature, and led to light and sun worship;
in some localities the terrific force displayed in the cyclone or the
thunder-storm seemed the mightiest revelation of the Unknown, and we
have the Lightning and Storm Myths; elsewhere, any odd or strange
object, any unexplained motion, was attributed to the divine, the
_super_-natural. The last mentioned mental state gave rise to those low
cults called “fetichism” and “animism,” while the former are supposed
to be somewhat higher and are distinguished as “polytheisms.” In all
of them, the prevailing sentiment is fear of the Unknown; the spirit
of worship is propitiatory, the gods being regarded as jealous and
inclined to malevolence; the cult is of the nature of sorcery, certain
formulas, rites and sacrifices being held to placate or neutralize the
ill-will or bad temper of the divinities. In its lowest forms this
is called “shamanism;” in its highest, it is seen in all dogmatic
religions.

In early conditions, each tribe has its own gods, which are not
supposed to be superior, except in force, to the gods of neighboring
tribes. No attempt is made to extend their worship beyond the tribe,
and in their images they are liable to be captured, as are their
votaries. Special prisons for such captive gods were constructed in
ancient Rome and Cuzco.

These “tribal religions” prevailed everywhere in early historic times.
The religion of the ancient Israelites, such as we find it portrayed
in the Pentateuch, was of this character. In later days, profoundly
religious minds of philosophic cast perceived that tribal cults do
not satisfy the loftiest aspirations of the religious sentiment. The
conceptions of the highest truths must be universal conceptions, and in
obedience to this the Universal or World-religions were formed.

The earliest of these was preached by Sakya Muni, Prince of
Kapilavastu, in India, about 500 B. C. It is known as Buddhism, and has
now the largest number of believers of any one faith. The second was
that taught by Christ, and the third is Islam, introduced by Mohammed
in the seventh century. It is noteworthy that all these world-religions
were framed by members of the white race. None has been devised by
members of the other races, for the doctrines advanced by Confutse and
Laotse in China are philosophic systems rather than religions.

The three World-religions named have rapidly extinguished the various
tribal religions, and it is easy to foresee that in a few generations
they will virtually embrace the religious sentiments of all mankind.
They are all three on the increase, Christianity the most rapidly by
the extension of the nations adhering to it, but Mohammedanism can
claim in the present century the greater number of proselytes, its
fields being in Central Asia, India, and Central Africa.

In the ethnographic study of religions for the purpose of estimating
their influence on the life and character of nations, we must take
notice especially of three points: 1. The ethical contents of a faith;
2. The philosophic “theory of things” on which it is based (cosmogony,
theosophy, etc.), and 3. Its power over the emotions, as upon this
rests its practical potency.

As currently taught, no one of the three world-religions named is
fully adequate on all these points. The cosmogony of Christianity is
a series of Assyrian and Hebrew myths contradicted by modern science,
and its ethical purity has been often sullied by efforts to place faith
in dogmas above the law of conscience. Mohammedanism, a more genuine
monotheism than Christianity, in some respects higher in practical
morality (temperance, charity, equality), and certainly superior in
power over the emotions, is weak in its doctrine of fatalism and in its
degradation of woman. Buddhism is tainted by a profound distrust of the
value of the individual life, by a false theory of the universe, and by
its borrowed doctrine of metempsychosis; but rises high in its appeals
to the sense of justice and right within the mind.

A religion tends to elevate its votaries in the proportion that it
withdraws their minds from merely material aims, and sets before them
stimulating ideals. This is the distinction between “material” and
“ideal” cults. Where the rites are directed mainly to conjuration,
where the prayers are for good luck in life, where the myths are mere
stories of exaggerated human shapes, there the faith is material. Such
were all the religions of the African blacks and of the Eastern and
Northern Asiatic tribes. They have never developed any thing higher.
Among the whites, however, and in a less degree among the American
Indians, there were mythical ideal figures, ranked among the gods, who
embodied grand ideal conceptions of the possible perfectibility of man,
and served as examples and models for the religious sentiment.[33]

The associative influence of a religion, whether tribal or universal in
theory, is singularly powerful. The Mohammedan who looks toward Mecca,
the Christian who turns toward Rome, feels a like bond of sympathy
with his fellow worshippers of every race and color, as did the
Israelite who wended his way to Jerusalem, or the Nahuatl who travelled
to the sacred city of Cholula. The pilgrimages, the Crusades, the
ecclesiastical Councils of past ages, have collected nations together
under the control of ideas stronger than any which practical life can
offer.

Other bonds of union are those derived from the practice of


_4. The Arts of Life._

Unquestionably the earliest of these to exert such an influence was
the construction of a shelter, in other words _architecture_. We know
that even glacial man had learned enough to make himself a house,
though it was probably inferior to that of the muskrat. In early
conditions one structure sheltered several families. Such are called
“communal houses,” and some ethnologists have argued that they are well
nigh universal down to a very late day in the evolution of domestic
architecture. The temple, the fortified refuge, the city with its
grouped homes shut in by a common wall of defence--all these illustrate
how architecture has ever tended to bring men together, and strengthen
their instincts of association.

Later in time but wider in its influence in the same direction was
the growth of _agriculture_. This art completely revolutionized the
habits of life, and rendered possible the advent of civilization. The
tribe, dependent on hunting and fishing or on natural products for a
livelihood, is necessarily migratory and separative in its habits. The
tillage of the ground with equal necessity demands a stable residence
and a centralization of individuals. The areas of primitive culture,
the sites of the earliest cities, were always in situations favorable
to agricultural pursuits.

Along with the cultivation of food-plants went hand-in-hand the
domestication of animals. The horse was trained independently in both
Europe and Asia, some species of the dog in all continents, the ox
for draft and the cow for milk principally in Asia, and the camel for
the deserts of Arabia and Africa. These humble aids brought together
distant tribes, and assimilated their characters.

The prosecution of the various special arts, as pottery, metal
work, textile-fabrics, etc., led to the formation of guilds and the
association of workers in particular localities favorable to obtaining
and utilizing the raw products. Each such conquest of the inventive
faculties drew men into closer bonds of harmonious labor, and opened
for them new avenues of joint industry. The pre-historic past of the
race is measured by archæologists by the rise and extension of new
arts, not because of themselves, but because they are indicative of
improved social conditions, greater aggregations of men, more potent
actions in history. The fine arts, in crowning the useful arts with
the iridescent glory of the ideal, impart to the handiwork of men that
universality of motive which unites all into one brotherhood.

The second class of psychic traits are:


II. THE DISPERSIVE ELEMENTS.

These have been of the utmost moment in the history of the species, and
a controlling factor in the records of every people. They are derived
from two quite different impulses in human nature; the one, a natural
propensity to roam, the other, a predisposition to contest.

Both have been favored by the ability of the species to adapt itself
to its surroundings, far surpassing that of any other animal. There is
no zone and no altitude offering the necessary food supplies that man
does not inhabit. The cat, with its traditional “nine lives,” perishes
in the upper Andes, where men live in populous cities. No one breed
of dogs can follow man to all latitudes. His powers of locomotion are
equally surprising. He can walk the swift horse to death, and his
steady and tireless gait will in the long-run leave every competitor
behind. An Indian will track a deer for days and capture it through its
utter fatigue. A Tebu thinks little of passing three days under the sun
of the Sahara without drinking. Such powers as these endow man with the
highest migratory faculties of any animal, and give rise to or have
been developed from


_1. The Migratory Instincts._

Many species of animals, especially birds, change their habitat with
the seasons, the object usually being to obtain a better food supply.
So do most hunting and fishing tribes, and for the same reason. Often
these periodical journeys extend hundred of miles and embrace the whole
tribe.

This must also have been the case with primeval man when he occupied
the world in “palæolithic” time. His home was along the shores of seas
and the banks of streams. Up and down these natural highways he pursued
his wanderings, until he had extended his roamings over most of the
habitable land.

What prompted him and all savage tribes is not always the search for
food. The desire for a more genial climate, the pressure of foes,
and often mere causeless restlessness, act as motive forces in the
movements of an unstable population. Certain peoples, as the Gypsies,
seem endowed with an hereditary instinct for vagabondage. The nomadic
hordes of the Asiatic steppes and the wastes of the Sahara transmit a
restlessness to their descendants which in itself is an obstacle to a
sedentary life.

Such vagrant tribes became the colporteurs and commercial travellers
of early society. They invented means or transportation, and
conveyed the products of one region to another. Only of late have
we learned to appreciate the wide extent of pre-historic commerce.
Long before Abraham settled in Ur of the Chaldees (say 2000 B.
C.), a well-travelled commercial road stretched from the cities of
Mesopotamia, through Egypt to the Pillars of Hercules, and thence into
Europe.[34] When Hendrick Hudson sailed into the bay of New York, the
commercial relations of the tribes who lived on its shores had already
extended to the coast of the Pacific.[35]

These lines of early traffic were also the lines of the migrations of
nations. They were fixed by the physical geography of regions, and have
rightly attracted the careful attention of ethnographers. Along them,
nation has blended into nation, race fused with race. The conviction
that early man was not sedentary, but mobile, by nature a migratory
species, wandering widely over the face of the earth, is one which has
been brought home to the ethnologist by the science of prehistoric
archæology, and it is full of significance.


_2. The Combative Instinct._

The philosopher Hobbes taught that the natural condition of man in
society is one of perpetual warfare with his neighbors. This grim
theory is sadly attested by a study of savage life. The wretched
Fuegians, the miserable Australians, with really nothing worth living
for, let alone dying for, fall to cutting each other’s throats the
moment that tribe encounters tribe. So it has been in all ages, so
it has been in all stages of culture. The warrior, the hero, is the
one who wins the hearts of women by his fame, and the devotion of men
by his prowess. Civilization helps not at all. In no century of the
world’s history have such destructive battles been fought as in the
nineteenth; at no former period have the powers of the earth collected
such gigantic armies and navies as to-day.

This love of combat at once separates and unites nations. To destroy
the common foe, the bonds of national or tribal unity are drawn the
tighter; and the aversion to the enemy tends to the preservation of the
ethnic type.

In spite of the countless miseries which follow in its train, war has
probably been the highest stimulus to racial progress. It is the most
potent excitant known of all the faculties. The intense instinct of
self-preservation will prompt to an intellectual energy which nothing
else can awake. The grandest works of imagination, the immortal
outbursts of the poets, from Homer to Whitman, have been under the
stimulus of the war-cry ringing in their ears.

The world-conquerors and the holy wars, Alexander and Napoleon, the
Crusades and the Mohammedan invasions, have been landmarks in history,
a destruction of the effete, an introduction of the new and the viable.
Guizot’s bold statement that in the decisive battles of the world it
has been, not the strongest battalions, but the truest idea which has
conquered, may be a profound ethnologic truth. Certain it is that in
weighing the psychical elements of man’s nature and their influence
on the past history of the species, we must assign to his combative
instincts a most prominent place as stimulants, and we must recognize,
amid all the miseries which they have brought upon him, the part they
have played in his development. That they have always resulted in
promoting the “survival of the fittest,” it is hard to believe, and
there is much to make us doubt; but that a great deal of the unfit has
thus been destroyed, we may reasonably accept.

What has been true always, is true to-day. It is force, might, which
forever exercises “the right of eminent domain;” and this principle is
as necessary as it is indestructible. Proudhon was logical, when, in
his treatise on _War and Peace_, he placed war and the duty of waging
war at the basis of all society, and defended it as the necessary
condition of civilization, inasmuch as it alone is the highest form of
judicial action, the last appeal of the oppressed. Never, we may be
sure, will the human species be ready or willing to forego this, the
greatest of all their privileges.



LECTURE III.


THE BEGINNINGS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF RACES.

    CONTENTS.--The origin of Man. Theories of monogenism and
    polygenism; of evolution; heterogenesis. Identities point to one
    origin. Birthplace of the species. The oldest human relics. Remains
    of the highest apes. Question of climate. Negative arguments.
    Darwin’s belief that the species originated in Africa confirmed;
    but with modifications. Quaternary geography of Europe and Africa.
    Northern Africa united with Southern Europe. Former shore lines.
    The Sahara Sea. The quaternary continents of “Eurafrica,” and
    “Austafrica.” Relics of man in them. Man in pre-glacial times. The
    Glacial Age. Effect on man. Scheme of geologic time during the
    Age of Man. His development into races. Approximate date of this.
    Localities where it occurred. The “areas of characterization.”
    Relations of continents to races. Theory of Linnaeus; of modern
    ethnography. Classification of races. General ethnographic scheme.
    Sub-divisions of races; branches; stocks; groups; peoples; tribes;
    nations. Other terms; ethnos and ethnic; culture; civilization.
    Stadia of culture.

In the rapid survey contained in the previous lectures you have seen
in how many points the races differ. No wonder that the question has
often been seriously mooted by scientific men, Could they all have been
derived from one common ancestral stock? This is the old debate about
“the unity of the human race,” still surviving under the more learned
terms of _monogenism_ or _polygenism_.

As to that other question, whether man came into being as such by a
gradual development, evolution, or transformation, from some lower
mammal, this may be regarded as the only hypothesis now known to
science, and must, therefore, be accepted, at least provisionally,
until some better is proposed. It is the only theory consistent with
man’s place in the zoölogical world, and is borne out by numerous
anatomical analogies, which have been referred to in my first lecture.

In fact, we are driven to it by necessity. No other origin of species
than by transformation of earlier forms has been suggested, even by
those who reject it. I do not speak of specific creation, for that
supposition does not belong to science, but to an obscurant mysticism,
which is the negative of all true knowledge.

But within the limits of the transformation theory there is more than
one method by which varying forms are produced, and one of these may
prove applicable to man, in whose earliest remains we have so far found
no positive indications of a lower physical character than he now
has.[36] So far, the “missing link” is as much out of sight as ever it
was; so far, man appears to have been always what he is to-day.

May he not, as a species, have come into being through a short
series of well-marked varieties, each produced by what is called
“heterogenesis,” that is, the birth of children unlike their parents?
All children are unlike their parents, more or less; and though at
present this unlikeness is strictly within the limits of the several
races, it is the opinion of some who have studied the matter, that in
earlier geologic epochs changes in organic forms were more rapid and
more profound than at present.

I am aware that this suggestion of heterogenesis looks like a return
to the ancient doctrine called _generatio equivoca_, which, in its old
form, is certainly obsolete. But there is no question that in many
existing plants and animals we find singular evidence that from a given
form another may arise, widely different in structure, and perpetuate
itself indefinitely. I am convinced that the importance of these facts
has never been properly appreciated by students of the origin of
species, and of the origin of men in particular.

This, or any hypothesis of evolution, renders the supposition quite
needless that the various races had distinct ancestral origins. Any
evolutionist who accepts the view that man is but a differentiation
from some anthropoid ape, is straining at a gnat after swallowing
the camel, if he hesitates to believe that the comparatively slight
differences between the races may not have originated from like
influences. Furthermore, the resemblances between the various races are
altogether too numerous and exact to render it likely that they could
have been acquired through several ancestries running back to various
lower zoological forms; a consideration greatly strengthened by the
fact that man is the only species of his genus, and there is even no
genus of his class closely related to himself. The chances that such a
perfected animal should have been twice or oftener developed from the
apes, monkeys or lemurs--his nearest cousins--are so small that we must
dismiss the supposition.

It seems to me, indeed, that any one who will patiently study the
parallelisms of growth in the arts and sciences, in poetry and objects
of utility, throughout the various races of men, cannot doubt of their
psychical identity. Still more, if he will acquaint himself with the
modern science of Folk-lore, and will note how the very same tales,
customs, proverbs, superstitions, games, habits, and so on, recur
spontaneously in tribes severed by thousands of leagues, he will not
think it possible that creatures so wholly identical could have been
produced by independent lines of evolution.

_The Birthplace of the Species._--Accepting the theories therefore of
the evolutionists and the monogenists as the most plausible in the
present state of science, it is quite proper to inquire where primeval
man first appeared, and what were his social conditions and personal
appearance.

To some it may seem premature to put such questions. They are
needlessly timid. It is never too soon to propound any question in
science; always too soon to declare that any has been finally and
irrevocably answered.

Beginning our search for the birthplace of the species, we may
consider that it will be indicated by the cumulative evidence of three
conditions. We may look for it, (1) where the oldest relics of man or
his industries have been found; (2) where the remains of the highest of
the lower mammals, especially the man-like apes, have been exhumed, as
it is assumed that man himself descended from some such form; and (3)
where we know from palæontologic evidence a climate prevailed suited to
man’s unprotected early conditions.

The first of these lines of investigation leads us to the science of
“pre-historic archæology.” We shall discover that a study of this
branch of learning is indispensable not only in this connection,
but to solve many other questions in ethnography. Here its answer
is unexpected. We have been taught by long tradition and venerable
documents to look for the first home of primeval man “somewhere in
Asia,” as Professor Max Müller generously puts it. He is inclined to
think that from the highlands of that continent the tribes dispersed in
various directions, some going to the extreme north, and then southward
into Europe. Others would have it that the species itself came into
life in the boreal regions, in that epoch when a mild climate prevailed
there.

Such dreams meet no countenance from pre-historic archæology. The
oldest remains of man’s arts, the first rude flints which he shaped
into utensils and weapons, have not been discovered in Asia, and do
not occur at all in the northern latitudes of either continent. They
have been exhumed from the late tertiary or early quaternary deposits
of southern England, of France, of the Iberian peninsula, and of the
valleys of the Atlas in northern Africa. They have been searched for
most diligently but in vain in Scandinavia, Germany, Russia, Siberia,
and Canada. Not any of the older types of so-called “palæolithic”
implements have been reported in early deposits in those countries.[37]
But in the “river drift” of the Thames, the Somme, the Garonne, and
the Tagus, quantities of rough stone implements have been disinterred,
proving that in a remote epoch, at a time when the hippopotamus
and rhinoceros, the African elephant and the extinct apes, found a
congenial home near the present sites of London, Paris and Lisbon,
man also was there. These relics, especially those found in Portugal,
Central Spain and Southern France, are the very oldest proofs of the
presence of man on the earth yet brought to light.

Where, now, do we find the remains of the highest of the lower animals?
By a remarkable coincidence, in the same region. Of all the anthropoid
apes yet known to the palæontologist, that most closely simulating
man is the so-called _Dryopithecus fontani_, whose bones have been
disinterred in the upper valleys of the Garonne, in Southern France.
Its height was about that of a man, its teeth strongly resembled those
of the Australians, and its food was chiefly vegetables and fruits.
Other remains of a similar character have been found in Italy.[38]

It is well known to geologists that the apes and monkeys or Simiadæ
were abundant and highly developed in Southern Europe in the pliocene
and early pleistocene, just the time, as near as we can fix it,
that man first appeared there. These facts answer the third of our
inquiries--that for a climate suitable to man in an unprotected early
condition, when he had to contend with the elements and the parsimony
of nature, ill-provided as he is with many of the natural advantages
possessed by other animals. At that date Southern Europe and Northern
Africa were under what are called sub-tropical conditions, possessing a
climate not wholly tropical, but yet singularly mild and equable. This
we know from the remains, both animal and vegetable, preserved in the
deposits of that epoch.

A series of negative arguments strengthens this conclusion. Where we
find no remains of apes or monkeys of the higher class, we cannot place
the scene of man’s ancestral evolution. This excludes America, where no
tailless and no narrow-nosed (catarhine) monkeys and no large apes have
been found; it excludes Australia, and all portions of the Old World
north of the Alps and the Himalayas.

In view of such facts, Darwin reached the conclusion that it is most
probable that our earliest progenitors lived on the African continent.
There to this day we find on the one hand the human beings most closely
allied to the lower animals, and the two species of these, the gorilla
and the chimpanzee, now man’s nearest relations among the brutes.[39]

Darwin was disturbed in this conclusion by the presence of the large
apes to whom I have referred in Southern Europe in late tertiary times.
This, however, merely requires a modification in his conclusion, the
general tenor of which, to the effect that man was first developed in
the warm regions of the western or Atlantic portion of the Old World,
somewhere within the present or ancient area of Africa, and not in
Asia, has been steadily strengthened since the great evolutionist wrote
his remarkable work on the _Descent of Man_.

_Quaternary Geography of Europe and Africa._--The modification which I
refer to is the obvious fact that since the late tertiary epoch, and
especially during and after the glacial epoch, some material changes
have taken place in the physical geography of Europe and Africa. To
these I must now ask your particular attention, as they controlled not
only the scene of man’s origin, but the lines of his early migrations.

When primal man, with no weapon or tool but one chipped from a stone
flake, roamed over France, England and the Iberian peninsula, along
with the rhinoceros, the hippopotamus and the elephant, the coast
lines of Europe and North Africa were quite unlike those of to-day.
England and Ireland were united to the mainland, and neither the
Straits of Dover nor St. George’s Channel had been furrowed by the
waves. Huge forests, such as can yet be traced near Cromer, covered
the plains which are now the bottom of the German Ocean. In the broad
shallow sea to the north, the mountainous regions of Scandinavia rose
as islands, and between them and the Ural Mountains its waters spread
uninterruptedly.

To the south, Northern Africa was united to Southern Europe by two
wide land-bridges, one at the Straits of Gibraltar, one connecting
Tunis with Sicily and Italy. The eastern portion of the Mediterranean
was a contracted fresh-water lake, pouring its waters into a broad
stream which connected the Atlantic with the Indian Oceans. This stream
covered most of the present desert of the Sahara, the delta of Egypt,
and a large portion of Arabia and Southern Asia. Its northern beach
extended along the southern base of the Atlas Mountains from the River
Dra on the Atlantic to the Gulf of Gabes in the Mediterranean; thence
northward between Malta and Sicily to the Straits of Otranto; by the
Ionian islands easterly till it intersected the present coast-line near
the mouth of the Orontes; northeasterly to about Diarbekir, whence
it trended south and east along the foot of the Zagros mountains to
the Persian Gulf. From that point it followed the present coast-line
to the mouth of the Indus, and thence pursued the base of the great
northern mountain range to the mouth of the Ganges, covering the north
of Hindustan, while the southern elevations of that spacious peninsula,
as well as a large part of southern and western Arabia, rose as
extensive irregular islands above the water. Toward them the mainland
of equatorial Africa extended much nearer than at present. It included
in its area the island of Madagascar, and reached far beyond into the
Indian Ocean. Toward the north, peninsulas and chains of islands,
now the summits of the plateaus and mountains of the central Sahara,
reached nearly or quite to the present shore-line of the Mediterranean,
about Tripolis.[40]

This disposition of the water left two great land areas in the old
world, probably not actually united though separated only by narrow
straits, one between the modern Tripolis and Tunis, and another on the
northern Syrian coast. I represent these areas on the accompanying map,
not indeed minutely, but approximately.

The general accuracy of the contours delineated are now fully
recognized by geologists. They are attested by the remaining
beach-lines of this primitive ocean, by the geographical distribution
of its contemporary fauna and flora, and by the proofs of elevation and
submergence along the shores and in the bottom of the adjacent seas and
oceans. The “great sink” of the western Sahara, the vast “schotts,” or
shallow saltwater ponds south of the Atlas, the salt Dead Sea at
the bottom of a profound depression, prove that the drying up of the
ancient ocean is scarcely yet complete.

[Illustration: OUTLINES OF THE EASTERN HEMISPHERE IN THE EARLY
QUATERNARY.]

So familiar have these ancient continental areas become to geological
students that they have been named like a newly-discovered island or
cape. The northern continent has been called _Eurasia_, compounded
of the words Europe and Asia, and the southern _Indo-Africa_, from a
supposed union of India and Africa.[41]

Neither of these names is quite acceptable. The former leaves out
of account the connection of Europe with Africa, which is of the
first importance in the study of early man; and the latter assumes
a geographic union between India and Africa, which is not likely to
have existed in the period of man’s life on earth. I prefer the two
names which I have inserted on the map; _Eurafrica_, indicating the
connection between Europe and Africa, and _Austafrica_, designating
the whole of the continent south of the ancient dividing sea. The name
_Asia_ should be confined to the Central Asian plateau and the regions
watered by the countless streams which flow from it toward the north,
east and south.

_Relics of Man._--Such was the configuration of land in the Eastern
hemisphere when man first appeared. We know he was there at that time.
I have referred to his rude stone (palæolithic) implements exhumed from
the river-drift of the Thames and the Somme, a deposit which dates
from a time when the hippopotamus bathed in those rivers; still older
seem some rough implements discovered in gravel layers near Madrid,
Spain, deposited by some large river in early quaternary times. The
worked flints near Lisbon were manufactured when a wide fresh-water
lake existed where now not a trace of it is visible on the surface,
and according to some archæologists, are the most ancient manufactured
products yet discovered.[42]

In numerous parts of North Africa, as near Tlemcen in the province of
Oran, and in Tunisia, the oldest forms of stone implements have been
found in place beneath massive layers of quaternary travertin,[43] and
in some of the most barren portions of the Libyan desert, now utterly
sterile, the travertin contains abundant remains of leaves and grasses,
along with chipped flints, proving that at the recession of this
diluvial sea not only was the vegetation luxuriant, but man was then on
the spot, as a hunter and fisher.[44]

Not less certain is it that he was a most ancient occupant of
Austafrica. Chert implements of the true “river-drift” type have been
discovered “in place” in quaternary stratified gravels near Thebes,
and elsewhere in the Nile valley; and in the diamond field of the Cape
of Good Hope, palæolithic forms have been exhumed from diluvial strata
forty or fifty feet below the surface of the soil.[45]

From similar evidence we know that man spread widely over the habitable
earth in that remote time. It is known to archæologists as the
earliest period of the Stone Age, and the implements attributed to it
are singularly alike in size and form. They seem to indicate a race
of beings who were unprogressive, lacking perchance the stimulus of
necessity in their mild climate and with their few needs.

_The Glacial Age._--But a wonderful change took place in their
conditions of life. Slowly, from some yet unexplained cause, mighty
ice-sheets, thousands of feet in thickness, gathered around the poles,
and collected on the flanks of the northern mountains. With silent but
irresistible might they advanced over land and sea, crushing beneath
them all animal and vegetable life, changing the perennial summer of
Eurafrica to an Arctic winter, or at best to an Alpine climate. The
tropical animals fled, the plants perished, and under the enormous
weight of the ice-mass, the ocean bottom in the north was depressed a
thousand feet or more. This in turn brought about material oscillations
in the land levels to the south. The bed of the Mediterranean sank,
that of the Sahara Sea slightly rose, leaving the latter little more
than a swamp, while the former assumed the shape which we now see.

These alterations in the land areas and climatic conditions exerted the
profoundest influence on the destiny of man. When with the increasing
cold the other animals native to warm regions had fled or perished,
he remained to encounter with undaunted mind the rigors of the boreal
climate. Instead of depressing or extinguishing him, these very
obstacles seem to have been the spurs to his intellectual progress.

Men were still in the lower stages of culture, with no knowledge of
metal, not capable of polishing stones, without a domestic animal or
trace of agriculture. Yet everywhere these artisans possessed skill and
sentiments far above that of the highest anthropoid ape described by
the zoölogist. They knew the use of fire, they constructed shelters,
they dwelt together in bands, they possessed some means of navigating
streams, they ate both vegetable and animal food, they decorated
themselves with colored earth and ornaments, they wielded a club,
they twisted fibres into ropes and strings, if occasion required they
fastened together skins for clothing. All this is proved by a careful
study of what tools and implements they have left us.

_Development into Races._--Whatever may have been the physical type of
men at their beginning, in culture they were upon the same level for a
long while after they had dispersed over the globe.

When, where and how did they develop into the several distinct races
that we now know?

We can answer these questions, not fully, but to some extent.

Man developed into certain strongly marked sub-species or races long
before the dawn of history. More than six thousand years ago the racial
traits of the black, the white, and the yellow races, and even of
their subdivisions, were as pronounced and as ineffaceable as they are
to-day. This we know from the representations on the Egyptian monuments
of the third and sixth dynasties, from the comparative study of ancient
skulls, and from the uniform testimony of the earliest writings,
wherever we find them.

This permanent fixation of traits, this profound impression of peculiar
features, was probably no rapid process, but a very slow one. It took
place between the close of the glacial epoch and the proto-historic
period. This interim gives time enough; at the lowest calculation, it
was twenty thousand years, while others have placed it at a hundred
thousand. The division of the species into races unquestionably was
completed long before the present geologic period, and under conditions
widely diverse from those now existing.[46]

As within these wide limits of time we can reply to the question when
the races became such, so within similar broad boundaries of space we
can answer where their peculiar types were developed.

At the dawn of history, all the clearly marked sub-species of man bore
distinct relations in number and distribution to the great continental
areas into which the habitable land of the globe is divided. Nearly
the whole of Europe and its geographical appendix, North Africa, were
in the possession of the white race; the true negro type was limited
to Central and Southern Africa and its appended islands; the yellow or
Mongolian type was scarcely found outside of Asia; and the American
sub-species was absolutely confined to that continent.

_The “Areas of Characterization.”_--In claiming that each sub-species
had its origin and developed its physical peculiarities in the land
areas here assigned to it, the ethnographer is supported by the
unanimous verdict of modern zoölogical science. “Whatever be the
cause,” writes the Rev. Samuel Haughton, “the distribution of fauna
shows clearly that forces have been at work, developing in each great
continent animal forms peculiar to itself, and differing from the
animal forms developed by other continents.”[47]

In ethnography, those geographical areas whose physical conditions
have left a durable impress on their human inhabitants have been
called either “geographical provinces” (Bastian) or “areas of
characterization” (de Quatrefages). I prefer and shall adopt the
latter as more indicative of the meaning of the term. It signifies
that like physio-geographical conditions prevailing over a given area
inhabited for many generations by the same peoples have impressed
upon them certain traits, physical and psychical, which have become
hereditary and continue indeterminately, even under changed conditions
of existence.

This general law is the recognized basis of modern scientific
ethnography.[48] It is open to numerous limitations, and its
application must never be made without the consideration of accessory
and modifying circumstances. For instance, certain areas are much more
potent than others in the influence they exert on man: some act more
powerfully on his mind than on his body, or the reverse; some peoples
are more susceptible to physical influences of a given class than
others; and the length of time required is variable.


_Scheme of Geologic Time during the Age of Man in the Eastern
Hemisphere._

                                 { Europe connected with Africa.      { Man homogeneous.
                                 { Temperature mild.                  { Industry palæolithic with
              { 1. Pre-glacial.  { African elephant in England.       {   simple implements.
              {                  { Tropical animals abundant.         { Migrations extensive.
              {                  {                                    { Language rudimentary.
              {
  Quaternary, {                  { Europe severed from                { Man dividing into races.
   Diluvial   {                  {   Africa.                          { Industry palæolithic with
      or      { 2. Glacial.      { Temperature low.                   {   compound implements.
  Pleistocene {                  { Reindeer in France.                { Cave dwellings. Migrations
    Epoch.    {                  { Arctic animals abundant.           {   limited; races in fixed areas.
              {
              {                  { Continents assume present forms.   { Races completely established.
              { 3. Post-glacial. { Temperature rising.                { Industry neolithic.
                                 { Temperate zones established.       { Beginning of sedentary life.
                                                                      { Languages developed in classes.

                                 { Geographic conditions undisturbed. { Races develop into contact.
              { 1. Pre-historic. { Wild animals not diminished.       { Industry of stone and copper.
              {
  Present     { 2. Proto-        { Conditions altered by agriculture. { Great migrations begin.
    or        {    historic.     { Wild animals slain or tamed.       { Industry of bronze and iron.
  Alluvial    {
   Epoch.     {                  { Geographic conditions greatly      { Extensive mingling of races.
              { 3. Historic.     {   modified by man.                 { Development of nations.
              {                  { All lower animals subjugated.

According to the analogy of other organic beings, man would have been
more impressible to his surroundings in the early history of his
existence as a species, the young, either as an individual or a genus,
being more plastic than the old. Furthermore, in his then condition of
culture, or absence of culture, he had less to oppose to the assaults
of his environment.

_Classification of Races._--It is not possible in the present status of
the science of man to point out precisely how the various conditions of
the great continental areas reacted on the homogeneous primitive type
to develop the races as we know them. The same difficulty encounters us
with other animals and with plants. We know, however, that at the dawn
of history each of these areas was peopled by nations resembling each
other much more than they resembled nations of any of the other areas.

In addition to the great continents there were many lesser regions,
peninsulas and islands, usually on the borders of the main areas of
characterization, where intermingling of types was sure to arise, and
other types be formed, who in turn received some particular impress
from their environment.

These considerations prompt me to offer the following as the most
appropriate scheme in the present condition of science for the
subdivision of the species Man into its several races or varieties.

I. THE EURAFRICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color white, hair wavy, nose
narrow, jaws straight, skull variable, languages inflectional,
religions ideal.

II. THE AUSTAFRICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color black, hair woolly, nose
flat, jaws protruding, skull long, languages agglutinative, religions
material.

III. THE ASIAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color yellowish or brownish, hair
straight, nose flat or medium, jaws straight, skull broad and high,
languages isolating or agglutinative, religions material.

IV. THE AMERICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color coppery, hair straight,
nose narrow, jaws straight, skull variable, languages incorporating,
religions ideal.

V. INSULAR OR LITORAL PEOPLES.--_Traits._--Color dark, hair lank or
wavy, languages agglutinative.

In this scheme the more prominent and permanent traits are named first.
While individuals of pure blood can easily be found in all the races
who do not correspond in all particulars to these descriptions, I do
not hesitate to assert that ninety-five per cent. of the whole of the
pure blood of any of the races here classified will correspond to the
standards given.

_Subdivisions of Races._--The further subdivisions of ethnography
follow to some extent the important doctrine of the “areas of
characterization,” that is, they are geographical; but as the
classification of men advances in minuteness, other considerations
become paramount, notably, language and government. These elements
allow us to subdivide a _race_ into its _branches_; a branch into its
_stocks_; a stock into its _groups_, and these again into _tribes_,
_peoples_, or _nations_.

Classified in this manner, the human species presents the subdivisions
shown on the adjacent scheme:


_General Ethnographic Scheme._

  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
   _Race._   | _Traits._   |_Branches._|   _Stocks._   |_Groups or Peoples._
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
             |             |           |              {|1. Libyan.
             |             |     I.    |1. Hamitic.   {|2. Egyptian.
             |Color white. |South      |              {|3. East African.
             |             | Medit-    |              {|1. Arabian.
  Eurafrican.|Hair wavy.   | erranean. |2. Semitic.   {|2. Abyssynian.
             |             |           |              {|3. Chaldean.
             |             |     II.   |1. Euskaric.   |1. Euskarian.
             |Nose Narrow. |North      |2. Aryac.      |Indo-Germanic or
             |             | Medit-    |               |  Celtindic peoples.
             |             | erranean. |3. Caucasic.   |Peoples of the
             |             |           |               |  Caucasus.
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
             |             |           |1. Central     |Dwarfs of the Congo.
             |             |    I.     |   African.    |
             |Color black  | Negrillo. |2. South       |Bushmen, Hottentots.
             |  or dark.   |           |   African.    |
             |             |           |1. Nilotic.    |Nubian.
             |             |   II.     |2. Soudanese.  |
  Austafri-  |Hair frizzly.| Negro.    |3. Senegambian.|
    can.     |             |           |4. Guinean.    |
             |Nose broad.  |  III.     |               |Caffres and Congo
             |             | Negroid.  |1. Bantu.      |  tribes.
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
             |             |    I.    {|1. Chinese.    |Chinese.
             |Color yellow | Sinitic. {|2. Thibetan.   |Natives of Thibet.
             |  or olive.  |          {|3. Indo-       |Burmese, Siamese.
             |             |           |   Chinese.    |
             |             |          {|1. Tungusic.   |Manchus, Tungus.
  Asian.     |Hair         |          {|2. Mongolic.   |Mongols, Kalmucks.
             |  straight.  |    II.   {|3. Tataric.    |Turks, Cossacks.
             |Nose medium. | Sibiric. {|4. Finnic.     |Finns, Magyars.
             |             |          {|5. Arctic.     |Chukchis, Ainos.
             |             |          {| 6. Japanic.   |Japanese, Koreans.
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
             |             |          {|1. Arctic.     |Eskimos.
             |Color        |   I.     {|2. Atlantic.   |Tinneh, Algonkins,
             |coppery.     |Northern. {|               |  Iroquois.
  American.  |Hair straight|          {|3. Pacific.    |Chinooks, Kolosh, etc.
             |  or wavy.   |  II.     {|1. Mexican.    |Nahuas, Tarascos.
             |             |Central.  {|2. Isthmian.   |Mayas, Chapanecs.
             |Nose medium. |  III.    {|1. Atlantic.   |Caribs, Arawaks,
             |             |Southern. {|               |  Tupis.
             |             |          {|2. Pacific.    |Chibehas, Qquichuas.
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------
             |Color dark.  |   I.     {|1. Negrito.    |Mincopies, Aetas.
  Insular    |             |Negritic. {|2. Papuan.     |New Guineans.
   and       |Hair wavy or |          {|3. Melanesian. |Feejeeans, etc.
  Litoral    |  frizzly.   |   II.    {|1. Malayan.    |Malays, Tagalas.
  Peoples.   |             |Malayic.  {|2. Polynesian. |Pacific Islanders.
             |Nose medium  |  III.    {|1. Australian. |Australians.
             |  or narrow. |Australie.{|2. Dravidian.  |Dravidas, Mundas.
  -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------

That these distinctions may be plain I append definitions of the
ethnographic terms employed.

_Race._--A variety or sub-species of the species _Man_, presenting a
number of distinct and permanent (hereditary) traits of the character
above described.

_Branch._--A portion of a race separated geographically,
linguistically, or otherwise, from other portions of the race.

_Stock._--A portion of a branch united by some prominent trait,
especially language, offering presumptive evidence of demonstrable
relationship. The individual elements of a _stock_ are its _peoples_.

A _group_ consists of a number of these peoples who are connected
together by a closer tie, geographical, linguistic, or physical, than
that which unites the members of the stock.

A _tribe_ is a body of men collected under one government. They are
presumably of the same race and dialect.

A _nation_, on the other hand, is a body of men under one government,
frequently of different languages and races. Its members have no
presumed relationship further than that they belong to the same species.

There are some other terms the precise meaning of which should be
defined before we proceed, the more so as there is not that uniformity
in their use among ethnographers which were desirable.

This very word _ethnos_, with its adjective _ethnic_, is an example.
What is an _ethnos_? I know no better word for it in English than a
people, as I have already explained this word,--one of the elements
of a stock all whose members, there is reason to believe, have
a demonstrable relationship. Thus we should speak of the Aryan
_stock_, made up of the Latin, Greek, Celtic and other _peoples_.
The relationship among the members of a _people_ is closer than that
between the members of a _stock_. _People_ corresponds to the Old
English _folk_ (German _Volk_), but _folk_ in the modern English
scientific terms “folk-lore,” “folk-medicine,” has acquired a different
signification.

_Culture_ and _civilization_ are other terms not always correctly
employed. The former is the broader, the generic word. All forms
of human society show more or less culture; but civilization is a
certain stage of culture, and a rather high one, when men unite under
settled governments to form a state or commonwealth (_civitas_) with
acknowledged individual rights (_civis_). This presupposes a knowledge
of various arts and developed mental powers.

Much attention was paid by older writers to dividing the progress of
culture into a number of stages or stadia. One of these, an American
author, Lewis H. Morgan, suggested an elaborate scheme according
to which the periods of man’s development should correspond with
historical conditions of culture, and these he divided into lower,
middle and upper states of savagery, barbarism, and civilization, each
characterized by the introduction of some new art.

The problem is far too complicated to admit of any such mechanical
solution. The possession of a given art, as the bow and arrow, or
smelting iron, does not lift a people, nor is it an indication of their
culture. Peoples low in one point are high in others; they develop
along different lines, with scarcely a common measure, and their place
in a general scheme must be determined by an exhaustive investigation
of all their powers and conquests, and perhaps a comparison with some
other standards than those which we have been brought up to consider
the best.



LECTURE IV.

THE EURAFRICAN RACE; SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

    CONTENTS.--The White Race. Synonyms. Properly an African Race;
    relative areas; purest specimens. Types of the White Race;
    Libyo-Teutonic type; Cymric type; Celtic type; Euscaric type.
    Variability of traits. Primal home of the White Race not in
    Asia, but in Eurafrica. Early migrations and subdivisions. North
    Mediterranean and South Mediterranean Branches.


_A._--THE SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

    I. THE HAMITIC STOCK. Relation to Semitic. 1. The Libyan Group.
    Location. Peoples included. Physical appearance. The Libyan
    blondes: languages. Early history; European affiliations; relations
    to Iberian tribes; the names _Iberi_ and _Berberi_. Government.
    Migration. The Etruscans as Libyans. Later history; present
    culture. Syrian Hamites and their influence. 2. The Egyptian Group.
    Kinship to Libyans. Physical appearance. The stone age in Egypt.
    Antiquity of Egyptian culture. Its influence. Physical traits. 3.
    The East African Group. Relations to Egypt.

    II. THE SEMITIC STOCK.--First entered Arabia from Africa. 1. The
    Arabian Group. Early divisions and culture. The Arabs. Physical
    types; mental temperament; religious idealism. 2. The Abyssinian
    Group. Tribes included. Period of migration. Condition. 3. The
    Chaldean Group. Tribes included. The modern Jew.

The leading race in all history has been the White Race. It is proper
therefore that it should have our chief attention in the study of
the distribution of the species. By some writers it is called the
Caucasian, by others the Japetic, and by others again the European
race--all inaccurate terms, for the race never originated in the
Caucasus, never descended from the mythical Japetus or Japheth, and
when first it appeared on the horizon of history, its most extensive
possessions and the seats of its highest culture were not in Europe,
nor yet in Asia, but in Africa.


_Scheme of the European Race: South Mediterranean Branch._

(Extinct peoples in _italics_.)

           {                          {  _Numidians_, _Getulians_,
           {                          {  _Libyans_, _Maurianians_,
           {                          {  _Guanches_, Berbers, Rifians,
           {  1. Libyan Group.        {  Zouaves, Kabyles, Tuareks, Tibbus,
           {                          {  Ghadumes, Mzabites, _Ghanatas_,
     I.    {                          {  _Etruscans_, _Amorites_,
  Hamitic  {                          {  _Assyrians_, _Hittites_. (?)
   Stock.  {
           {  2. Egyptian Group.      {  Copts, Fellaheen.
           {
           {                          {  Gallas, Somalis, Danakils,
           {  3. East African Group.  {  Bedjas, Bilins,
           {                          {  Afars, Khamirs.

           {                          {  _Himyarites_, _Sabeans_,
           {  1. Arabian Group.       {  _Nabotheans_, Arabs,
           {                          {  Bedawin, Ehkilis.
    II.    {
  Semitic  {                          {  Amharnis, Tigris,
   Stock.  {  2. Abyssinian Group.    {  Tigrinas, Gheez,
           {                          {  Ethiopians, Harraras.
           {
           {  3. Chaldean Group.      {  Israelites, Arameans, Samaritans.

This statement may astonish you, and I know no writer who has properly
emphasized the fact that the white race is geographically and
historically an _African_ race. I have calculated with some care the
area of its control of the three continents when their inhabitants
first became known. The results are these: The white race then
possessed:[49]

  In Asia        2,500,000 square miles.
  In Europe      3,000,000   “      “
  In Africa      3,500,000   “      “

These figures vindicate for the race the title I have given
it--Eurafrican.

More than this: the purest and finest physical specimens of the white
race always have been and _still are_ found native to African soil;
and the leading nations of the race, those who have most contributed to
its glory, and to the advance of the civilization of the world, either
have resided in Africa or can be traced to it as their ancestral home.

_Types of the White Race._--Let us first define the characteristics,
physical and mental, of the white race.

In one of its pronounced types, the individuals are blondes, tall
in stature, the eyes blue or grey, the hair yellow or reddish and
wavy, the beard full, the nose narrow and prominent (leptorhin),
the chin well defined, the jaws straight (orthognathic), the skull
long (dolichocephalic) or medium, the eyes narrow (microsemes), the
supra-orbital ridges rather prominent, the face moderately oval.

This is the typical appearance of the ancient Goths, Teutons and
Scandinavians, and of the modern Swedes and Germans. It was also that
of the ancient Libyans, and is still preserved in the greatest purity
among their descendants in Morocco and Algiers; hence I shall call it
the Libyo-Teutonic type.

A second type is also tall in stature, but red-haired, freckled
complexion, the face and forehead broad, the cheek bones
prominent, the eyes nearly circular (megasemes), the jaws
and mouth projecting (prognathic), the skulls broad and high
(brachycephalic-hypsistenocephalic), the chin square and firm.

This is the type we see preserved in some of the Highland Scotch clans,
and in the “Tuatha de Danann” of Ireland, recalling the large-limbed
and red-haired “Caledonians” of Tacitus, and those ancient Britons
who, under Queen Boadicea, withstood so valiantly the Roman legions.
The Gauls or Cimbri of Belgium and northern France were of this type,
and hence it has been called the “Cymric” type.

But there is a second Celtic type, also of vast antiquity, claimed by
some to be the only pure form. In it the skull is also broad--broader
than the former variety; but the stature is undersized, the hair and
eyes dark-brown, the complexion brunette, the orbits rounded, the
forehead full. Modern representatives of this type are the dark clans
of the Highlanders, the Irish west of the river Shannon, the Manx, the
Welsh, the Bretons of France, the Auvergnats, the Walloons of Belgium
and the Ladins of eastern Switzerland.

The most ancient known seats of these dark Celts were in extreme
western Europe and the isles adjacent. This location points them
out as one of the oldest peoples in Europe, whether their presence
is explained by immigration or autochthonous descent. Part of their
possessions in early historic times was in the Iberian peninsula,
along the Cantabrian mountains in northern Spain. Here they were in
immediate contact with members of the white race of a different type,
the Euscarians or Basques.

In them the stature is medium, the form symmetrical, hair and eyes are
dark but rarely black, the complexion dark and sallow, the face oval,
and the skull long, the length being in the posterior (occipital)
region. Although the last mentioned is an important distinction
between the Celtic and the Euskaric skull, there is unquestionably a
closer resemblance physically between the Celts and Basques, who speak
totally diverse tongues, than between the Celts and Cymri, whose tongue
was the same.

In these four typical groups from the extreme west of Europe we find
sharp contrasts within limited areas, among peoples some of whom are
unquestionably consanguine. Two of the groups, the Teutonic and Cymric,
belong in color and hair and stature to the blonde type, but differ
profoundly in shape of skull and facial bones; the two others belong to
the brunette type, but differ equally in osseous character. In general
physical traits the Celtic differs less from the Euskaric than from the
Cymric type, as was recognized by the historian Tacitus.

These facts bring out an ethnic principle of importance--the
variability of traits within the racial limits--and this becomes more
marked as the race is higher in the scale of organic development. No
race remains closer to its type than the Austafrican, none departs
from it so constantly as the Eurafrican. Wherever we find the unmixed
white race we find its blonde and brunette varieties, its prognathic
and orthognathic jaws, its long-skulled and broad-skulled heads.[50] To
establish genealogic schemes exclusively upon these differences, as
has been the work of so many living anthropologists, is to build houses
of cards.

These contrasts are presented to us daily. The researches of Virchow,
De Candolle, Kollmann, and many others, prove that in the same city,
in the same family, the children to-day are born brunettes or blondes,
dark or light eyed, to some degree broad or narrow skulled, with but
partial reference to their parents’ peculiarities. The aberrant types
are usually about twenty per cent. of the whole. It seems generally to
have been so in the unmixed white race wherever located.

All such variations, however, remain strictly within the racial lines,
and are not approximations to other races. Each race retains to-day the
characteristics of its earliest representatives, so far as we know them.

_Primal Home of the White Race._--Where should we look for these
earliest representatives, for the primal home of the Eurafrican race?
The usual answer has been “in Asia,” but now that answer is rejected by
all the younger and most earnest ethnologists.

A steady stream of information has of late been contributed by the
sciences of linguistics, palæontology, pre-historic archæology and
racial anatomy, sufficient to convince even the skeptical that not
Asia, but the western water-shed of the Eastern Continent, was the area
of characterization which developed this race with its marked physical
traits and singular mental endowments. In the previous lecture I have
shown you that man himself probably came into being as such within the
limits of that region which I have described as Eurafrica; and as its
conditions were such as to foster his transformation from some inferior
primate, so they continued, though profoundly altered, to favor his
growth, as they still do continue to-day. It is by no mere accident or
result of political manœuvres that western Europe has for two thousand
years produced the mightiest nations and greatest minds of the earth.

The discussion of the precise locality where in Europe the primitive
man developed into the white race has occupied many learned pens in
the last score of years. But by nearly all of them the discussion has
been limited to the birthplace of merely the Aryan linguistic stock--an
unfortunate narrowness of view, which has prevented a comprehensive
grasp of the question at issue.[51]

The Aryan peoples present by no means the only, nor yet the purest
types of the white race. I have seen quite as noble blondes among the
Kabyles of the Djurjura as in Denmark, quite as handsome brunettes
among the Basques of the Pyrenees as among the Celts of France or the
Italians. A broad construction of the question must include all these,
and in this spirit I approach it.

We must search for the first abode, the primitive “area of
characterization” of the white race:

1. Where its most ancient residence and greatest numbers were in
earliest historic times.

2. Where the prehistoric remains prolong that residence most remotely
back.

3. Where the earliest forms of linguistic structure continue to exist
in large communities.

4. Where its purest types are retained in considerable numbers.

5. Where the climatic conditions are favorable to the physical traits
of the race.

If we can select a locality in which all of these arguments unite, the
cumulative evidence is so powerful that we may consider the question
settled.

I have already shown that at the dawn of history the white race
possessed either in Europe or Africa a far larger area than in Asia,
and possessed it practically exclusively. The most recent researches in
the pile dwellings of the Swiss lakes and the plain of the Po show that
the same race inhabited them from the classic period of Greece to far
back in the stone age.

The most ancient shell-heaps or kitchen-middens on the shores of
Portugal contain skulls of the peculiar type of the Basques of to-day.
The hiatus or gap which was once supposed to exist between palæolithic
and neolithic culture in France has been bridged over by numerous
observations, showing that the same race continued to live and grow
there.[52] As for language, every linguist recognizes the agglutinative
type of the Basque, and the semi-agglutinative character of the
Berber as more antique forms than the inflectional caste of Aryan or
Semitic tongues. Nowhere else do white tribes speak an agglutinative
tongue, except a few in the Caucasus, where we know they settled at a
comparatively recent period.

The purest types of the whites in any large number have always been
found in Western Europe and Northwestern Africa. There the blondes
were represented by the Suevi, the Goths, the Vandals, the Cymri, the
Berbers; the brunettes by the Euskarians, the Celts, and the native
Italic tribes. In the Orient, the Parsees, the high-caste Brahmins,
the Siagosch of the Hindu Kusch, and some Caucasian tribes, have by
close intermarriage retained in a measure the traits of the race; but
confessedly not in the same distinctness as the nations of Western
Europe; nor do the Semitic peoples of Asia present the purity of the
type with anything like the distinctness of the descendants of the
Libyans in the valleys of the Atlas. Finally, we do not anywhere
in Asia find the physical conditions favorable to the development of
the white race--the moist, cool, cloudy climate, the extensive shady
forests covering broad areas of low elevation, with absence of malaria
and diminished demand on the chylopoietic organs.

[Illustration: ETHNIC CHART OF THE EURAFRICAN RACE.]

_Early Migrations and Subdivisions._--It is not necessary to suppose
that the different peoples of the race developed themselves from one
central point. The contrary is more probable.

Beginning at the extreme West of Europe, and its appendix North Africa,
the race pursued an easterly course, divided by the great intervening
sea of the Mediterranean into two sections, which for convenience I
designate as the “North Mediterranean” and the “South Mediterranean”
branches, though it will be seen that these geographical limits are not
to be taken absolutely.

The North Mediterranean branch embraces as its most important member
the Indo-Germanic peoples. When first heard of in history, this stock
extended along the shores and islands of Europe from Cape Finisterre
to the Gulf of Finland, occupying all of Central Europe and much of
Asia Minor, the regions of Modern Persia, and at a later date the
southern vales of the Himalayas. Its northern limits have always been
in contiguity with the Asian or Yellow race. Stretch a line on the map
from Singapore to St. Petersburg, continue it to the Atlantic, and you
have roughly the ethnic boundary which has ever separated the races,
and does so to-day.

In western Europe, south of the Aryac was the Euskaric stock, occupying
central Spain, central and southern France, portions of Italy, and
various islands in the Mediterranean.

As speaking a language of a different family from the prevailing
inflectional type of the race, it is spoken of as “allophyllic.” It
does not stand alone in this respect. Some of the white Caucasian
tribes speak similar agglutinative tongues, and it is supposed by some
that the ancient Pictish, Illyrian, Lycian, Van, and Etruscan were of
similar character. Probably many such languages obtained which are now
extinct.

The South Mediterranean Branch consists of two related stocks, which
have been called the Hamitic and the Semitic. These names are not
objectionable, in so far as they indicate a distant genealogic unity,
still recognizable, between the two branches; but should not in any way
be accepted as acknowledging as historic facts the myth of the Deluge
and their origin in Asia. The reverse is true. The migrations of both
stocks have been from west to east, and the two great branches of the
White Race entering Asia, the one by the Bosphorus and the second by
the Isthmus of Suez, encountered each other after thousands of years of
separation in the region where the venerable myth locates their point
of departure.


A. THE SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

I shall begin my survey of the race and its distribution with the
South Mediterranean branch, as that which has been the more important
of the two in history, controlling by far the greater territory, and
developing the earlier and more potent civilizations. It has ever been,
and still is, the leader in intellectual acumen, and the monuments of
its achievements, both in the realms of thought and action, remain
unrivalled in the world. With great propriety, therefore, it claims our
first attention.


I. THE HAMITIC STOCK.

The affinity between the Hamitic and Semitic stocks is distinctly shown
by their physical traits and the character of their languages. The
latter statement, which was long in doubt, has now been acknowledged
by the most competent students, such as Friedrich Müller and A. H.
Sayce.[53]

Within their own lines the Hamites are divided into three groups, the
Libyan, the Egyptian and the East African groups, each distinguished by
physical and linguistic differences.


_1. The Libyan Group._

Of these the Libyan group occupies the region furthest to the west,
and presents the purest type of the stock. From time immemorial it has
occupied the land from the Nile Valley to the Atlantic, and from the
Mediterranean to the Soudan. In the classical geographies its tribes
are referred to as Numidians, Libyans, Mauritanians and Getulians, and
at present they are known as Berbers, Rifians, and Shilhas in Morocco,
the Tuariks and Tibbus of the desert, the Kabyles and Zouaves in
Algeria, the Ghadames, Serkus, Mzabites of the south, the Senegas of
Senegal, and many others. The Guanches, who once inhabited Teneriffe,
and are now extinct, belonged to the Rifian tribes of this stock,[54]
and the rulers of the once powerful empire of Ghanata, which for
centuries before the rise of Mohammedanism controlled the valley of the
Upper Niger, were allied to the Moroccan family.[55] Arab historians
of the seventh century tell us that at that time the Berbers were “the
lords of Maghreb (Africa), from the Arabian Gulf to the western ocean,
and from the middle sea to the Soudan.”[56]

The physical appearance of the Libyan peoples distinctly marks them
as members of the White Race, often of uncommonly pure blood. As the
race elsewhere, they present the blonde and brunette type, the latter
predominant, but the former extremely well marked. Among the Kabyles in
Algeria, I have seen many fine specimens of blondes, with yellow hair,
light eyes, auburn beard, and tall stature. An English traveller who
visited last year some remote villages in the mountains of Morocco,
describes their inhabitants as “for the most part fair, with blue
eyes and yellow beards, perfectly built and exceedingly handsome
men.”[57] This has been from the earliest times the characteristic of
the Libyans, and there is abundant evidence that it was more general
in former centuries than it is now. The Guanches of Teneriffe are
described by the first voyagers as unusually tall and fair, their
yellow hair reaching below their waists.[58]

The Greek poet Callimachus, who was librarian of the famous library
at Alexandria two hundred and fifty years before the Christian era,
applies the same adjective ξανθος, blonde or auburn, to the Libyan
women, which Strabo and other Greeks do to the Goths and blonde Celts
of Germany.[59]

Long before this, again, in monuments of the XIXth dynasty of Egypt,
the Libyans are painted as of a pronounced blonde type, with light
eyes and skins, and are mentioned by a term which signifies fair or
blonde.[60] The extended researches of ethnologists on this point have
accumulated a mass of facts proving that the ancient Libyans were in
appearance strikingly similar to the North Germans and Scandinavians,
having a fair skin, yellow or auburn hair, blue or grey eyes, full
blonde beards, the face medium, the skull dolichocephalic, the orbital
ridges prominent, the chin square and firm, forehead vertical or
slightly retreating, the stature tall, and the body powerful.[61]

This identity of type impressed me very much among the Kabyles,
and I note that the German ethnologist, Quedlinfeldt, who was
among the Berbers in Morocco lately, writes of them: “I very often
met individuals with flaxen hair and blue eyes, who in face and
form corresponded perfectly to the ordinary type of our North
German people.”[62] For this reason, I give it the name of the
“Libyo-Teutonic” type.

In the pure-blooded clans who still dwell in the fastnesses of the
Atlas and the Djurdjura, this antique type is that which is general;
but in the valleys, in the desert and in Tunisia the type is darker,
having been corrupted by admixture with negro, Arabic and other
stocks.[63] The fact which I wish especially to impress on you is that
nowhere do we find a purer type of the white race than in northern
Africa, and that this was recognized by the earliest writers and
records as that especially belonging to this stock.

The languages spoken by the various Libyan peoples prove on examination
to be dialects of one tongue, all so much alike that a few days’
practice will enable the speaker of any one of them to express himself
in another. In its grammatical formation, it is inflectional with
agglutinative tendencies. Its radicals are made up of consonants, the
indications of time and place being formed by changes in the vowel
sounds. In this respect it resembles the Semitic tongues, but differs
from them in having radicals of one, two, three, or four consonants,
while they have usually those of three consonants only. In many other
respects it presents analogies to the Semitic dialects, of such a
nature that these latter seem to have developed themselves out of
conditions of speech as represented by the Libyan. Hence some writers
have called it and its allied tongues “proto-Semitic languages.” It
stands in distinct relation to the Coptic or ancient Egyptian, and to
some East African dialects.

The Libyans have possessed from time immemorial the country in which
we find them. They are its indigenous inhabitants--all others, as
Carthaginians, negroes and Arabs, being demonstrably intruders. Can we
obtain any clue to their monuments in prehistoric times by the aid of
archæology and linguistics? Some able students have thought they could,
and have brought forward some singular surmises. There is a series
of structures of huge stones, called dolmens, menhirs and cromlechs,
extending over northern and central France, southern England, northern
Spain, Portugal, Morocco, Algiers, and central Tunisia. They are much
alike, and seem to have been constructed by some one people in very
ancient times. The skulls in them are often long, like those of the
Libyans and Teutons. Hence several French writers have suggested that
the ancestors of the white Libyans moved from central Europe into
Morocco, along the line of these megalithic structures.[64]

In spite of a good deal of severe criticism, there remains much in
favor of the view that these remains mark a route by which some
neolithic people extended their conquests. But it seems to me the trend
of migration was in the other direction, _toward_ the east, and not
from it. The white race began as such during the glacial epoch; it
could scarcely have developed north of the Pyrenees, for the climate
was so cold that the reindeer, which to-day cannot breed in Stockholm,
found a suitable home in the valley of the Garonne. The Iberian
peninsula and the Atlas at that time possessed climatic conditions
about like those of Great Britain to-day.

In that peninsula, at that time connected with Morocco by a land bridge
at the straits of Gibraltar, are the oldest forms of languages spoken
by the race, the Euskaric dialects. There is reason to believe that at
the dawn of history these occupied the centre of the peninsula; north
of them, in the Cantabrian mountains and along the shores of the Bay of
Biscay, were the Celtiberians, the rearguard of the migratory hordes
of Aryans; and along the southern shores and in North Africa extended
the tribes whose direct descendants are the Libyan peoples. The name
_Iberi_, Iberians applied by the ancients to the inhabitants of the
eastern and southern shores of Spain, testifies to this. It means
in the Libyan tongue _freemen_, and in the plural form _berberi_ or
Berbers, is that by which the old Egyptians knew them, and which from
the same root is their own favorite designation to-day.[65]

That the Iberians were Hamites, and not Basques, has long been
suspected, and is plainly the opinion to be derived from the statements
of the ancients and the presence of Libyan proper names in the south of
Spain.[66]

When the Berber chieftain Tarik crossed the straits in the
seventh century, and gave to the great rock his name (Gibraltar,
Djebel-el-Tarik), he was but returning to seize anew the land from
which his ancestors had been driven by Carthaginians and Romans.

From the remotest times the Libyans have had the same form of
government--village communities, united by loose bonds into
federations. The Egyptians referred to them as “the Nine Bows,” or
Bands,[67] the Romans as the “Quinquigentes,” the Five Peoples, the
Arabs as “Qabail” or Kabyles, Confederates. These confederations were
sufficiently powerful, even so far back as 1400 years before Christ,
to put in the field an army of 30,000 or more men for an attack on
Egypt; and that the general culture of their country was quite high is
shown by the character of the spoils obtained by the Egyptians--horses,
chariots, vessels of brass, silver, copper and gold, swords, cuirasses,
razors, etc.[68]

At that date the nations of the North Mediterranean branch were yet
in the stone age, and the sites of Greece and Rome were the homes of
savages.[69]

It is probable that this defeat of the Libyans by the armies of Rhamses
gave a serious shock to their progress, by disintegrating their growing
state. It appears that about this time there were various colonies
which migrated to sites on the northern shores of the Mediterranean.
One of these I have believed to be the Etruscans, who settled on the
west coast of Italy about 1200 years before our era. They were tall
blondes, dolichocephalic, speaking an un-Aryan language, and by their
traditions came by sea from the south.[70]

The Libyans were at times partially under the dominion of the kings of
Egypt, and many of them entered the Egyptian armies as mercenaries.
They allowed the Phenicians peaceably to found the great city of
Carthage on their shores, and from these early colonists they learned
the art of writing. The alphabet which is still preserved among some
of their hordes is derived from the Punic letters.[71] When Carthage
fell, Rome seized the mastery of the coasts and productive valleys, but
her legions never penetrated to the inland fastnesses. When the great
empire tottered to its fall, Goths and Vandals poured across and over
the straits of Gibraltar to found an ephemeral empire in Africa; but
these cavalry soldiers, knowing to fight only on horseback, scarcely
touched the confines of the Libyan mountain homes. Even the Arabs,
sweeping resistlessly across their land in the beginning of the eighth
century, failed to penetrate many of these fastnesses. To this day no
Arab dares venture into the land of the Rifian Berbers, and many a
tribe of the Djurjura keeps its customs and its blood unaltered by the
Koranic laws, or the Semitic intruders, or the Code Napoleon of the
French invaders.

The ancient elements of their culture are still largely retained.
Among the Kabyle and Touareg tribes of to-day, in spite of the liberty
authorized by Islam, monogamy is the almost invariable rule, the women
are not only respected, but generally possess most of the property,
and prostitution is unknown. They are, moreover, usually the learned
class, and most of the “tifinar” manuscripts come from the hands of
these fair scribes.[72] As to the general character of the Berbers of
Morocco, we may take Sir Joseph Hooker’s word when he tells us that
they are “decidedly superior in intelligence, industry and general
activity to their neighbors.”[73]

The wander-loving Libyan tribes pursued other journeys far to the east.
Following the coast of the Mediterranean, they formed settlements on
the Syrian shore, and extended their possessions into the Mesopotamian
valley, and north into the mountain vales of Asia Minor. The Phenicians
and Canaanites, the Amorites, who were blonde Berbers of true Libyan
type, the Hittites, and the old Assyrians, who were the builders
of Babylon and Nineveh, were of Hamitic stock, as is shown by the
accordance of the ancient biblical statement with modern linguistic and
archæological research.[74]

From these culture-centres of the Hamitic stock followed the mighty
stream of human progress back along the southern shores of the
Mediterranean to Cyrene and Carthage, and along its northern shores
to Cyprus, Greece, Italy and beyond; while the Accadian and Summerian
learning, preserved for all time in the cuneiform writing, made its
beneficient influence felt far into India and China, and reacted
beneficially on the older wisdom of Egypt, from which it had at first
largely drawn its inspiration.


_2. The Egyptian Group._

From this all too hasty survey of this most ancient people we must turn
to another, akin to it, which has played an important, yes, the most
important part in the culture-history of our species. I refer to the
ancient Egyptians. They belonged to the Hamitic stock, but wandering
eastward from its primal seats certainly more than ten thousand years
before our era, had possessed themselves of the Nile valley from the
mouth of the stream quite up to and beyond the first cataract.

Their kinship to the Libyans is proved by numerous linguistic
identities between the ancient Coptic and the Libyan dialects, and by
their physical appearance. In color they are yellowish-white, passing
to a reddish-brown though the women who are not exposed to the sun
would pass in Europe as merely dark brunettes. In the bony structure,
the skull, the face, and the proportions, they assimilate entirely
with the white race and the Libyan type. This has been shown by the
researches of Virchow and others.[75]

The ancient Egyptian is represented to-day by the modern Fellah or
field-laborer of the Nile. The type has been very well preserved, for
though the riches of this wonderful valley have attracted myriads of
foreigners in peace and war from the earliest times, all have suffered
greatly in longevity and fertility compared to the native population.
This type is of medium stature, the limbs and body symmetrical and
delicately moulded; the skull is long, the face oval, the hair dark
and straight, or slightly curly; the eyes are brown and small, the
nose straight, the lips rather full, the mouth small, the chin not
prominent, the beard scanty.

In all respects, in the pure Copt we must recognize a delicate,
thorough-bred member of the Eurafrican race, in spite of his
reddish-brown hue. These traits are to be explained by the narrow
limits of the Nile valley, shut in by trackless deserts from the rest
of the world. Here for thousands of years lived this stock, closely
intermarrying, and under climatic conditions of singular uniformity.

Whether they were the first inhabitants of the valley has not been
ascertained. Certain it is that at a period long before the date we
usually assign to Egyptian civilization, a people dwelt on the Nile
ignorant of any implements but those of rough stone. Their relics have
been found in the stratified gravels of the hills, and on the summits
of the arid plateaus.[76] I know no reason, however, to suppose that
the tribes of the Egyptian stone age were other than the ancestors of
those who were brought under the control of the founder of the first
dynasty, the historic king Mena.

This was about 4000 B. C. But previous to him the ancient Egyptian
priests claimed some 25,000 years of occupation under various gods and
demi-gods; and the general accuracy of their claim I am not prepared to
dispute.[77] Certainly the culture of lower Egypt must have been at a
high level for thousands of years before the date of Mena, or he could
never have established the state which we know he did. From all that
archæology has yet taught us, we must place the beginnings of Egyptian
civilization earlier than that in the valley of the Yang tse Kiang,
earlier by far than any other on the globe. Its streams have permeated
all the lands to which the Eurafrican race have extended; fecund as the
waters of its own Nile, its elements have nourished and developed the
best intellectual powers of the race through all subsequent ages; to it
we owe the seeds of our arts, the germs of our sciences, the forms of
our religion, the schemes of our literatures, and the inestimable boon
of our written language. Look where you will among the most ancient
remains of the Old World culture, you find the impress of Egypt’s Land
and mind--in Etruscan tombs, in Guanche mummy caves, in treasure houses
of Mycenæ, in Cypriote vaults, in Assyrian mounds, under Carthagenian
foundations.[78] The species Man owes nowhere else such gratitude as to
these African nations of the Eurafrican race.

The Egyptian presents the best known and complete type of the psychical
traits of the Hamitic stock. Unideal, laborious, utilitarian, he was
devoted to material progress and the gross animal enjoyments of life.
His preferred employment was agriculture, his favorite art the huge
in architecture, his religion was a polytheism with numberless images
and pictures, his pleasures were those of the appetite, his hopes of
immortality were bound up with the preservation of the present body.


_3. The East African Group._

The singular uniformity of the Egyptian type does not allow us to
divide it into several branches, and on account of its segregated
position, it does not seem to have had much intercourse with the east
African group of the Hamitic stock, living to the south of it.

At present this east African group of the Hamites includes the Bedjas
and Bilins between the Nile and the Red Sea, the Afars or Danakils
near the mouth of the Red Sea, Gallas and Somalis between the gulf of
Aden and the Indian ocean, and the adjacent tribes of the Agaouas,
Adals, Khamirs, and others. In appearance these peoples are usually
reddish brown in color, with dark wavy hair, of moderate stature and
symmetrical form, the face oval and the skull moderately long, the nose
aquiline and the chin well shaped, and heavier built than the Egyptians.

Their life is principally nomadic, living in tents of skin, and
governed by chiefs who rule over small communities. The descent is
reckoned and property passes on the female side. Some are Mahommedans,
but hold the faith lightly, and like the Kabyles, attach more
importance to the customs of their clan than to the precepts of the
Prophet. In many parts they betray admixture with the Negro tribes to
whom they are neighbors, and from whom they have always obtained slaves.

Thus the Danakils are described as sooty black, with scanty beards,
thin calves, and thick lips, but with features and hair in other
respects quite European, their faces rarely prognathic, and their
bodies symmetrical.[79] The Somalis are lighter in color, but like the
Danakils, do not cultivate the soil nor establish fixed abodes.


II. THE SEMITIC STOCK.

Owing to the unreasoning acceptance of myths as history, it is
generally believed that the Semites originated in Asia. From what I
have already said you will appreciate that such an opinion is quite
inconsistent with modern research. We may, at the most, concede that
the peculiar form of their language and certain physical traits were
developed during their long residence in the peninsula of Arabia,
where history first finds them. But that they entered Arabia in remote
pre-historic times from Africa, and not from Asia, is now acknowledged
by an increasing number of learned and unprejudiced writers.[80]

There is a difference of opinion whether this immigration was by the
way of the Isthmus of Suez or the Straits of Bab el Mandeb, but the
course of their wanderings in Arabia seems to have been from north to
south, the Ethiopian Semites being distinctly emigrants from the other
side of the Red Sea. Hence the probability is that the ancestors of
the ancient Arabians wandered from the Libyan plateau, or the eastern
Atlas, through the Delta into the region of the Sinaitic mountains,
whence they spread south and east, forming several distinct groups.[81]


_1. The Arabian Group._

The first of these included the Arabians proper. At a very early period
they became divided into a northern and southern portion, the former
represented by the Ishmaelites and Bedawins, the latter by the ancient
Himyarites, Sabeans and Nabotheans, and the modern Ehkili and kindred
clans. The Himyaritic nations had important cities, and possessed a
written literature at least 700 B. C., and probably much earlier.[82]
The Queen of Sheba, who paid a memorable visit to King Solomon, came
from one of these cities, and her journey is strong testimony to the
admiration for learning which prevailed in her land, and which she so
evidently fostered.

At that time, and for centuries afterwards, there were few parts of
the world more favored than the southern portions of the peninsula.
It was known as “Arabia felix,” Araby the Blest, and was famed for its
abundant products, its spices and perfumes, and the wealth and luxury
of its inhabitants. Some change of climate apparently, and the inroads
of the Ishmaelitic hordes, quite destroyed this happy condition about
the fifth century, A. D. The Himyaritic language disappeared, the
cities were laid waste, many of the people migrated to Africa or sank
into despised outcasts, as the present Ehkili of the Hadramaut. In this
manner the whole of the great peninsula fell under the control of the
true Arab.

It is he who preserves in his language the oldest and purest form
of Semitic speech, and in mind and body its most pronounced mental
and physical type. He is rather tall (1.65), his face oval, the nose
straight or aquiline, the features sometimes singularly noble and
prepossessing, the skull long (index 73°-75°), the complexion ruddy
rather than brown, when due allowance is made for the tan, and the hair
slightly wavy or straight. Crisp hair is looked upon with disapproval,
as indicating mixed and ignoble blood.[83] In temperament the Arab is
abstemious, and his powers of physical endurance are phenomenal. His
mental temperament is that of an idealist; he has added nothing to
the grand creations of plastic art, nothing to inventions of utility
in life, nothing to the marvels of architecture or the beauties that
appeal to the senses; he cares neither for history nor the drama. In
his dreams he conquers the world, and it falls at his feet; in fact,
his greatest states have been ephemeral bubbles.

Yet his dreams have been realized. The Semite has conquered the world,
and it is at his feet. Twice have arisen among his people majestic
forms, before whom all civilized nations bow, Jesus and Mahomet.

The religious idealism which led the Semite in the days of Moses to
reject the images of stone and wood and proclaim that God is one,
overawed in its later expressions the whole of the white race, and now
extends its sway to the farthest seas.

Though the Aryan to-day may dislike the Semite and doubt of the God
whom he preached, let him not forget that the first vivid impression
of such a great idea came from the Semitic stock. If in his marts,
his diplomacy and his learned professions, he finds the Semites still
pressing him aside, let him remember that this is the people whose
destiny seems to be to own no country, but to rule all.


_2. The Abyssinian Group_

Of tribes is evidently descended from fugitives from the Arabian
peninsula. The Ethiopians, or Geez (a word meaning emigrants), speak
a dialect the nearest related to the Himyaritic of the inscriptions.
It has a literature and an ancient alphabet of its own. The Tigre,
the Massawa, the Amhara, and, further to the south, the Harrari, are
Semitic dialects, more or less akin to the Ethiopic.

The period when this migration took place is not precisely known, but
it was at a calculable period before the beginning of our era. Quite
likely it was about the time of the dissolution of the Joktanide
monarchy in the Hadramaut. There can be no question but that the course
of migration at this point was from Arabia into Africa.

The Tigre is the predominant nation of North Abyssinia, the Amhara in
the south of that region. The Harrari extends into the land of the
Somalis. All these are of Himyaritic descent, but near them are a
number of later Arab tribes who speak dialects of the modern Arabic.
These are the Jalin about Khartoum, and others near Senaar and Baqqara,
west of the Nile. There are also many Jews, who have inhabited the
country from the early centuries of our era.

An infusion of negro blood is visible in much of the population. Their
color is dark brown, the hair is crisp, and the features are negroid.
Where this mingling is absent, the color is a light or bright brown,
the face oval, the nose thin, lips not at all thick, and the hair wavy
and straight. In other words, the features are truly European, framed
in a brown setting.

The Abyssinians proper have always been an agricultural, pastoral and
manufacturing people. The soil is fertile and the climate temperate,
but there are no large rivers, and communication is difficult. The
crops are barley, dates, millet, sugar-cane, etc. Formerly the country
was under one ruler, who was called the Grand Negus. The late “Negus,”
Theodoras, could put in the field over fifty thousand fighting men,
and made himself so obnoxious to Europeans that the English sent an
expedition against him in 1868, and he perished under the ruins of his
capital, Magdala.

From the fourth century the principal religion in Abyssinia has been
Christianity, but in a corrupt form, mixed with the ancient heathen
observances, such as ceremonies at the rise of certain stars, and
veneration of holy stones and springs. The clergy are numerous,
estimated at about 72,000, and exert a leading influence in the state.
There are many monks and nuns living in cloisters, and possessing
extensive holdings. The church service is conducted with an effort
at pomp, and there is a considerable sacred literature, of very
little value. The influence of the religious teaching on the people
is scarcely visible except in making them fanatical, superstitious
and averse to enlightenment. Abyssinia thus presents the picture of
a country which for more than 1500 years has been a Christian state,
and where Christianity has wholly failed to render the people moral,
intelligent or pure.


_3. The Chaldean Group._

The third group of the Semites was the Chaldean, including the Syrians
and Arameans, the later Assyrians and Babylonians, the Israelites,
Samaritans and Jews. All these were from early times deeply tinged
with other blood. The Syrians and Chaldeans removed first from the
Arabian peninsula, and their dialects depart the furthest from the
pure stock. Abraham, the traditional ancestor of the Israelites, left
northeastern Arabia for Mesopotamia about 2000 B. C., to dwell in “Ur
of the Chaldees,” a city near the mouth of the Euphrates. Already the
Chaldees had secured from the older Hamitic settlers a portion of
Mesopotamia, and gradually extended their conquests.

Many of the Syrians united with the Hamitic residents on the coast,
so that the Phœnicians became largely Semitized. All these nations
were in constant intercourse with the highly developed civilization of
Egypt, as is shown by the Mosaic books, and from that source derived
most of the germs of their intellectual growth. In spite of their love
of travel and commerce, in spite of their dispersion over the earth,
this group has retained a striking individuality. Many ethnographers
charge it against the Jews that the presence of blondes among them, and
of brachycephalic heads, proves a crossing of the blood. This is not
the case. The Semitic stock is a markedly white type of the race, and
in all ages fair complexion, light eyes and hair, have been admired
as especially beautiful. This is repeatedly referred to in the Hebrew
Scriptures, and is shown by observation among these people at the
present day.[84]

The physical type of the Jew is well known and unmistakable; wavy
hair, dark or blonde, full beard, eyes soft, nose prominent, rather
heavy, with an accentuated and peculiar outline, lips full, face oval,
skull medium or long. Nor are his mental traits less familiar; a
pliant, supple disposition, a distaste for physical labor or the toil
of the pioneer or soldier; deficiency in personal courage; subtlety
in monetary transactions; quickness in applying social or individual
weaknesses to his own benefit; industry in intellectual pursuits; love
of display and of position; strong devotion to family ties.

This is the Jew as we know him in the tussle of modern life, a
character prominent in all European and American cities, without a
nationality, in conflict with the prevailing religion, suspected and
disliked, but wielding an influence out of all proportion to the
numerical strength of his people. It may be regarded as continuing in
his person that remarkable intellectual superiority which the South
Mediterranean Branch of the white race has from the earliest time
exerted on the history of man.


_Scheme of the Eurafrican Race.--North Mediterranean Branch._

(Tribes in _italics_ are extinct.)

  I. Euscaric Stock. 1. Euscaric group.  {Euscaldonac, Basques, _Sards_, _Siculi_, _Aquitanians_,
                                         {  _Picts_ (?), _Ligurians_ (?), _Cantabrians_.

                                         {_Gauls_, Highland Scotch, Irish, Welsh, Manx,
                     {1. Celtic group.   {  Bretons, _Celtiberians_, _Cymri_.
                     {                   {_Latins_, _Umbrians_, _Oscans_, _Sabines_, Italians, French,
                     {2. Italic group.   {  Spanish, Portuguese, Roumanians, Wallachians.
                     {3. Illyric group.  ._Illyrians_, Albanians, _Thracians_,_Japyges_ (?).
                     {4. Hellenic group. ._Pelasgi_, _Phrygians_, _Lydians_, _Macedonians_, Greeks.
  II. Aryac Stock.   {5. Lettic group.   .Letts, Lithuanians, _Old Prussians_.
                     {6. Teutonic        {_Goths_, _Vandals_, _Franks_, _Angles_, _Saxons_, _Suevi_,
                     {     group.        {  Scandinavians, Germans, Danes, Dutch, English, Anglo-Americans.
                     {7. Slavonic        {Russians, Poles, Czechs, Servians, Croatians,
                     {     group.        {  Wends, Bulgarians, Montenegrins.
                     {8. Indo-Eranic     {Armenians, Persians, _Bactrians_, Hindoos,
                     {     group.        {  Kafirs, Dards, Beluchis, Hunzas, Gypsies.

                     {1. Lesghic group.   .Avars, Laks, Udes, Kurins.
  III. Caucasic      {2. Circassic group. .Circassians, Abkhasians.
         Stock.      {3. Kistic group.    .Tush, Karaboulaks.
                     {4. Georgic group.   .Georgians, Mingrelians, Lazs.



LECTURE V.

THE EURAFRICAN RACE: NORTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

CONTENTS.--_B._--THE NORTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

    I. THE EUSKARIC STOCK. Basques and their congeners. Physical type.
    Language.

    II. THE ARYAC STOCK. Synonyms. Origin of the Aryans.
    Supposed Asiatic origin now doubted. The Aryac physical
    type. The proto-Aryac language. Culture of proto-Aryans. The
    “proto-Aryo-Semitic” tongue. Development of inflections.
    Proto-Aryac migrations. Southern and northern streams. Approximate
    dates. Scheme of Aryac migrations. Divisions. 1. The Celtic
    Peoples. Members and location. Physical and mental traits. 2. The
    Italic Peoples. Ancient and modern members. Physical traits. The
    modern Romance nations. Mental traits. 3. The Illyric Peoples.
    Members and physical traits. 4. The Hellenic Peoples. Ancient
    and modern Greeks. Physical type. Influence of Greek culture. 5.
    Lettic Peoples. Position and language. 6. The Teutonic Peoples.
    Ancient and modern members. Mental character. Recent progress. 7.
    The Slavonic Peoples. Ancient and modern Members. Physical traits.
    Recent expansion. Character. Relations to Asiatic Aryans. 8. The
    Indo-Eranic Peoples. Arrival in Asia. Location. Members. Indian
    Aryans. Appearance. Mental aptitude.

    III. THE CAUCASIC STOCK. Its languages. Various groups and members.
    Physical types. Error of supposing that the white race came from
    the Caucasus.


In my previous lectures I have shown with as much detail as my time
permits, that the original home of the white race was in that portion
of the Atlantic seaboard which I have called _Eurafrica_, and which
includes the present areas of northwestern Africa and southwestern
Europe. From this region, I have pointed out, the race divided into two
branches, the one moving eastward, south of the Mediterranean sea, the
other in the same direction, north of this separating stream. To-day we
shall consider the ethnic history of the latter.


B. THE NORTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

Unlike the South Mediterranean Branch, whose languages present
everywhere some degree of resemblance, sufficient to predicate for them
a remote common origin, the North Mediterranean Branch includes several
stocks fundamentally diverse. They are the Euskaric, the Aryac, and the
Caucasic stocks. The second of these is by far the most extended and
important; but, as I have previously observed, it does not bear the
impress of the highest antiquity, nor yet is its location that where
we should look for the most ancient members of this branch. Both these
conditions are fulfilled by


_1. The Euskaric Stock._

At present this contains but one group, the Basques, residing in the
valleys of the Pyrenees, on both the Spanish and French frontiers.
There is little doubt from the linguistic studies of Humboldt and
from the researches of archæologists that the Basques once extended
widely throughout the present area of Spain and Portugal; but I am
not inclined to identify them with the Iberians of the classical
geographers, for reasons given in my last lecture. There is a great
deal of evidence that in proto-historic times they occupied central and
southern France, portions of Italy, Corsica, Sardinia, perhaps Sicily,
and some southern tracts of England. Many believe that the ancient
Aquitanians and Ligurians, the Picts and Cantabrians, were of this
stock, as well as the pre-Aryac tribes of Greece.[85]

I described in my last lecture the Basques as representatives of one
of the dark types of the white race, with a peculiarly shaped skull,
elongated posteriorly.[86] The face is oval, the chin pointed and weak.
The general aspect indeed of a Basque cranium conveys the impression of
a feeble character, and such the history of the people shows them to
have been. They never contributed anything to the advance of the race,
and from their earliest appearance in history have been retiring before
the pressure of sturdier nationalities. At present they do not number
over three hundred thousand, and in a few generations will be merged in
the neighboring Spaniards and French.

The Basque language belongs to one of those primitive forms of human
speech such as we find among the Negroes of Central Africa, or the
savage tribes of Siberia. It is of that type called agglutinative and
polysynthetic, and in some points has the incorporative tendency of
American tongues. It is the speech of a people whose ideas remained
confined to objective material relations. According to the latest
students, it is absolutely without connection with any of the so-called
Turanian (Ural-Altaic) languages, and is equally remote from the
Hamitic group.[87]

I now turn to


_2. The Aryac Stock_

of peoples and languages. It is sometimes called the “Indo-European,”
or “Indo-Germanic,” or “Celt-Indic”[88] stock, and embraces the
principal historic nations of Europe, and in Asia the Armenians,
Persians and Hindostanees.

_Origin of the Aryans._--No ethnographic question of late years has led
to keener discussion than the origin and affinities of these peoples.
The theory derived from the Hebrew myth of the Deluge, that they
migrated into Europe from Asia, was long accepted without question,
and seemed to be strengthened by the discovery that Sanscrit, the
classical language of India, and Zend, the ancient tongue of Persia,
are related to Greek, Latin and German.

But reflection and extended observation led to other results. It was
perceived that the majority of the Aryac peoples had lived in Europe
from the remotest historic times, and only a small minority in Asia;
that some of the Aryac tongues of Europe retain more ancient forms
than either Sanscrit or Zend; that the oldest traditions point to
migrations from Europe into Asia, and not the reverse; that these
traditions are supported by the Indian Aryans, who distinctly claim
that their ancestors migrated from the north into India, and by the
Persians, whose sacred book, the Avesta, declares they were not the
original owners of Iran, and finally by an examination of the arts of
the pre-historic Europeans,[89] and an exhaustive analysis of the words
common to all the dialects of Aryac speech, which indicate that the
ancestral tribe must have lived in geographic surroundings not to be
found in the Aryac districts of Asia, but answering in all points to
the regions of central or western Europe.

I constantly see it stated in works on ethnology and linguistics that
the scientist who first advanced this opinion was the Englishman,
Dr. Robert G. Latham. Nothing is more erroneous. For a score of
years before he introduced it to the English public, this view had
been repeatedly and ably defended by the eminent Belgian naturalist,
d’Omalius d’Halloy. He lost no opportunity of showing that the
ancestors of the modern Europeans did not come from Asia, but belonged
originally to the continent they now inhabit.[90]

Since his first promulgation of this theory in 1839, the evidence in
its favor has been slowly but steadily accumulating, until now it
numbers among its adherents practically all the ethnologists of the
day who do not feel committed by their previous writings, or by their
creeds, to the Asian hypothesis. Among the English writers who have
recently treated the subject with marked ability and much more fullness
than is possible for me at present, I mention Canon Isaac Taylor and
Professor A. W. Sayce; in Germany, O. Schrader, Karl Penka, Theodor
Pösche, L. Geiger, and in France, M. de Lapouge, etc.

I shall not enter into a recital of these arguments, for I believe the
debate is so nearly terminated that the conclusion may be accepted that
the Aryac peoples originated in Western Europe and migrated easterly.
This you will observe is in accord with the general theory of the
origin and distribution of the white race which I laid before you, and
is a potent argument in its support.

_The Aryac Physical Type._--When we endeavor to fix more precisely
the home of that tribe which was the lineal Aryac progenitor, several
considerations must be carefully weighed. The physical types of the
Aryac people differ markedly, as I stated in my last lecture, and some
writers (Penka, Lapouge, etc.) have claimed that the Teutonic, the tall
blonde type, is peculiar to the Aryans, and must have been the original
character. But it is found with just as great purity among the Libyans
of Africa, so that the assumption is vain.

It is an undeniable fact that at the earliest period, both in Europe
and Asia, the majority of Aryan-speaking peoples were brunettes,
and it is also a fact that in the population of Europe to-day
there is a tendency to revert to that type. When a blonde and a
brunette intermarry, ten per cent. more children will take after the
brunette.[91] There is a probability, therefore, that the original
Aryac tribe was a mixture of blondes and brunettes, with a majority of
the latter, and also that the form of its skulls was variable, some
long, some broad.[92]

This would indicate a mixed descent, and such, no doubt, it owned.
It is absurd to suppose the contrary. The type of _the proto-Aryac
language_ is one which originates not early, but late in the history
of human speech. The process of grammatical inflection is the highest
stage of linguistic evolution. It is the result of a slow growth, in
which the material elements of language are transformed into formal
elements, and the “grammatical categories,” or parts of speech,
gradually assume logical distinctness and independent expression. We
can watch this growth in its imperfect form in the Nahuatl of Mexico
and the Berber of Morocco; and when we see it completed, as in the
Arabic or Latin, we may be sure it is a comparatively late fruit of the
human intellect. The expressions common to all Aryac languages reveal a
primitive social condition to correspond with this. It was above that
of savagery. These common ancestors had domesticated dogs, cattle, and
perhaps sheep; nomadic at times, they at some seasons tilled the soil;
they were acquainted with copper, and brewed mead from honey; they
had probably even invented a wagon, and milked their cows, and they
certainly lived on or near the seashore, and used boats.

The conclusion is that the original inflected Aryac tongue arose
from the coalescing of two or more uninflected agglutinative or
semi-incorporative tongues, the mingling of the speeches being
accompanied, as always, by a mingling of blood and of physical traits.
This explains the fact that has puzzled so many ethnologists, that
there is no fixed Aryac type.

Where should we look for this intermingling to have taken place? From
the arguments already advanced you would naturally say, somewhere on
the western coast of Europe.

This is supported by an unexpected piece of evidence of a strong
character. The system of consonants is undoubtedly the most persistent
part of a language, and there is no question but that the Celtic
and Lithuanian, of all the Aryac tongues, have kept most closely to
the primitive system of consonants once common to them all.[93] The
Lithuanian is spoken by a limited community on the coast of the Baltic
sea, while the Celtic, in proto-historic times, occupied the whole of
Great Britain and northern Belgium, France and Spain. In the two latter
areas it was from immemorial time in close connection with the Euskaric
(Basque), and perhaps the Libyan (Berber) groups, and it is possible
that in comparatively late (neolithic) times the Aryac with its
inflections might have been developed from these partly agglutinative
languages.

This suggestion is not so hazardous as it may seem. William von
Humboldt, one of the ablest linguists of this century, suggested that
the Basques and the Celts, the Ligurians and the Gauls, in spite of the
contrasted structure of their languages, may have sprung from the same
ethnic trunk, and derived their languages from a common source.[94]

Other scholars of eminence, such as Delitzsch, Ascoli, Raumer,
Schultze and Abel, have pointed out numerous affinities between the
Hamito-Semitic, Libyan, old Coptic and Assyrian tongues, and the
oldest Aryac forms, and have argued for the existence of a fundamental
“proto-Ayro-Semitic” speech which existed before the separation of
the white race into its northern and southern branches.[95] There
is evidence that this very ancient tongue was of the “isolating”
character, with a tendency to agglutination by suffixes.

It is now recognized that inflection did not exist in the primitive
Aryac dialects, but was gradually developed by means of such suffixes
added to the stem, by different processes in the different dialects,
many of which are in activity to-day.[96] These inflective processes
bear closer resemblance to the Libyan, which has suffixes, and the old
Egyptian, than to pure Semitic tongues, which leads to the suggestion,
again, that the separation of the race was in the west rather than the
east.

_Proto-Aryac Migrations._--Leaving these speculations as to the origin
of the Aryac stock, let us sketch its probable migrations, as indicated
by linguistic research. It appears to have divided early into two main
streams, the one occupying central and southern Europe, the other
moving eastward on a northerly route, the two meeting as they neared
the Bosphorus.

The central stream was of Celtic affinities. Its tribes having
possessed themselves of the coast line from Cape Finisterre to the
mouth of the Rhine and the islands of Great Britain, passed up the
valleys of the Rhine and its affluents into southern Germany, the
valleys of Switzerland and the Tyrol, quite to the Danube. Its
easternmost tribes were probably the Dacians.

The Aryac Italic peoples, the Umbrians, the Oscans, the Latins, were
the first offshoot of this southern migration; not that they were
directly descended from the Celts, but that they sprang from the same
division of the primitive Aryac stock. This is still so clear that I
remember Matthew Arnold in his lectures on poetry quotes sentences
from ancient Irish which are also intelligible Latin.

A second offshoot was the Illyrians, who peopled the northern and
eastern shores of the Adriatic, the ancestors of the modern Albanians.

A third was the Hellenic people, organized later than the Latins, and
imbued with elements quite foreign to these.

The northern stream was the Letto-Slavic, whose primitive home was on
the shores of the German Ocean north of the mouth of the Rhine, and in
the region which extends thence to the Gulf of Finland. Its members
presented the physical traits of the Libyo-Teutonic type, contrasting
in this to the traits of the central and southern stream, who were
of the dark type of the race. The Cymric type seems to have been a
mingling of the two, and was found at or near the boundaries between
them.

At a comparatively late period--certainly after the beginning of the
bronze age, as we know from their languages--the Teutonic tribes
separated from the Letto-Slavs, and moved into Central and South
Germany, where they remained. Numerous Slavonic hordes, however,
pushed eastward, some passing to the north of the Black and Caspian
Seas, where they formed the ancient Sarmatians, others approaching the
Hellespont, where they mingled with Celtic and other elements to make
the Thracian and other peoples.

Passing into Asia across the Hellespont and Bosphorus, or along the
coast in their vessels, or pursuing the shores of the Caspian, numerous
Aryac colonies from the vanguard of the eastern emigrants wandered into
Asia. The Indo-Eranians that is, the ancient Persians and Sanscrit
speaking tribes, entered first and progressed farthest, settling in
Iran, and occupying the land between the Caspian Sea and the Indian
Ocean.

Later came the Phrygians and Armenians, who had formerly lived in
Thrace, crossing the Bosphorus and establishing themselves in Asia
Minor.

The dates of these occurrences can be fixed only approximately. The
Armenian migration was later than 700 B. C., as previous to that date
the Vans, a people of non-Aryac speech, occupied the region later known
as Armenia. The Brahmans crossed the Hindu-Kusch into India, about
1500-2000 B. C., and the Persians possessed themselves of Iran at least
a thousand years earlier.


_Scheme of Aryac Migration._

+--------------------------------+--------------------+-----------------
                                 |   _European._      |  _Asian._
+--------------------------------+--------------------+-----------------
                |                |Letto-Lithuanians.  |
                | Northern       |Teutons.            |
                |   Peoples      |--------------------|-----------------
                |   (Blondes).   |Slavonians.         |_Phrygians._
  Primitive     |                |_Thracians._        |_Cappadocians._
  Aryans.       +----------------+--------------------+Armenians.
  (Western      |                |_Dacians._          |_Medes._
  Europe.)      |                |Hellenes.           |Iranians.
                | Southern       |                    |Indians.
                |   Peoples.     +--------------------+-----------------
                |   (Brunettes). | _Illyrians._       |
                |                |Italians.           |
                |                |Celts.              |
+---------------+----------------+--------------------+-----------------

  (The names in _italics_ are of extinct peoples.)

We must not suppose that the languages of these peoples developed
one out of the other. That is not the way languages grow. It was by
contact in various centres with various dialects and wholly different
linguistic stocks that the speech of these nomads was altered. They
did not journey always in one direction, but to and fro, now rapidly
advancing, now retreating, now long stationary, ever through war,
commerce and marriage adding new elements to their speech, each tribe
developing its dialect with independent material and on different
grammatical principles.

We are now prepared to study the historic and modern representatives of
this important stock.


_1. The Celtic Peoples._

The Celtic peoples of the present day form a decaying group, which in
a few generations will wholly disappear. Two thousand years ago they
were the most important Aryac stock in central and western Europe.
Their sole representatives now are the Highland Scotch, the Irish, the
Manx, the Welsh, and the natives of Brittany in France. In all these
localities the Celtic speech is losing ground before English or French.
In Ireland about 900,000 persons can speak Irish, but not more than
150,000 are ignorant of English.

These Celtic groups form two dialects, one spoken in Scotland, Ireland
and the Isle of Man, known as _Gaelic_, the other common to Wales,
Brittany, and in the last century to Cornwall, called _Armorican_ or
_Cymric_. The Irish possessed a sparse literature going back to the
eighth century, and the Welsh to the twelfth, while the oldest Scotch
or Breton songs date at the furthest from the fourteenth century, in
spite of assertions to the contrary.

To this day the Celtic peoples present the same contrast of physical
type that they did to the Romans. Some of the Scotch clans, many of the
Irish, most of the Welsh and Bretons, are of moderate stature, dark
eyes and hair, and brunette complexion, while the remainder are tall,
raw-boned, red-haired, with florid, freckled skins and tawny beards.

Their mental traits are quite as conspicuous; turbulent, boastful,
alert, courageous, but deficient in caution, persistence and
self-control, they never have succeeded in forming an independent
state, and are a dangerous element in the body politic of a free
country. In religion they are fanatic and bigoted, ready to swear
in the words of their master, rather than to exercise independent
judgment. France is three-fifths of Celtic descent, and this explains
much in its history and the character of its inhabitants.


_2. The Italic Peoples._

The principal Aryac tribes who possessed themselves of the Italian
peninsula were the Umbrians in the north, and the Samnites (or Oscans)
and Latins in the south. They conquered in time the Etruscans,
Ligurians, Volscians and others of non-Aryac lineage, and laid the
foundation for the mighty Aryac Empire of Rome, destined to command
the world, and to introduce the Latin tongue as the dominant speech of
Southern Europe.

From the Latin speaking Roman colonies have sprung the _Romance
languages_ of modern times and the existing “Latin peoples.” These
include the modern Italian, the French, the Spanish, the Portuguese,
the Roumanian, the Wallachian, and the Ladinish in Switzerland, besides
a number of dialects. Through the conquests of the European Romance
nations, their tongues have gained the ascendency over the whole
continent of America south of the United States, over a large part of
Canada and North Africa, and over many islands. To-day, the speech of
imperial Rome, more or less modified, prevails over an area five times
as great as that of the empire in the zenith of its glory.

Like the language, the physical type of the ancient Italic peoples
indicated their near relationship to the dark Celts. The Latin and
Umbrian skulls were short or rounded (brachycephalic), the stature
medium, the hair dark and curly, the eyes brown or black, the nose
aquiline, the complexion brunette. In later generations this type was
modified by mixture with the blonde or long-skulled Etruscans, and the
numerous foreigners who came to live in Rome; but to this day it is
that which prevails throughout the peninsula.

None of the Romance nations can boast of much purity of descent.
After the fall of the Western Empire (476 A. D.), hordes of Germans
poured into Italy; they also overran France and Spain, while Arabs
and Berbers occupied for generations nearly the whole of the Iberian
peninsula, the island of Sicily, and portions of France. The Roumanians
are partly Slavonic, and the Portuguese have Celtic and Basque blood.

Tn spite of these admixtures, the Romance peoples have retained many
of the mental features of the old Romans. In government they display
the same acknowledgment of authority, love of system and bureaucratic
forms of administration, which made the Roman municipium the wonder of
the world; in religion, they cultivate the same respect for external
show and material rites rather than for the ideal aspects of faith;
and in literature, it is only in later days that they have declared
independence from the models of classicism, which too long fettered
their best minds.

The ancient Romans had little idealism. They achieved nothing in
poetry, philosophy or the plastic arts. It was owing to the Hellenic
and Semitic influence that, under the Empire, Rome became the centre of
artistic, as of all other training. These acquired qualities have been
transmitted to the Romance nations, and it is to them we owe nearly all
that is best in art down to the beginning of the present century. The
sentiment of symmetry is native to them, and one has but to compare
either the scientific works or the public buildings of France with
those of Germany during the last five-and-twenty years to be convinced
how the sense of form is present in the former and defective in the
latter.


_3. The Illyric Peoples._

The ancient Illyrians were the ancestors of the modern Albanians, a
people numbering in all nearly two million souls, occupying a portion
of western Turkey, bordering on the Adriatic Sea, about 40° north
latitude. They are scarcely more than semi-civilized, and neither
in ancient nor modern times have they taken any prominent part in
the history of Europe. Their language undoubtedly belongs to the
Aryac stock, and has various affinities with Greek and Latin, but
is a long-separated and almost isolated fragment of Aryac speech.
The national name they give themselves is Skypetars, which means
mountaineers. They are also known as Arnauts.

The physical type of the Albanians is mixed, those to the south being
chiefly blondes, to the north brunettes; their skulls are generally
long, their stature tall, their bodies muscular. Some of them are
Mohammedans, others Roman Catholics, while others belong to the Greek
church. In disposition they are turbulent and warlike, caring little
for the amenities of civilization.

The nearest related groups to the Illyrians are believed to have been
the Thracians, who were a blonde people, the Dacians, who were largely
Celtic, and the Macedonians. Some recent writers have argued that the
ancient Japyges were Illyrians, and had occupied most of the peninsula
of Italy previous to the arrival of the Latins;[97] but this question
remains obscure.


_4. The Hellenic Peoples._

It is acknowledged even by those who maintain the Asiatic origin of the
Aryans that the Greeks entered the peninsula and the adjacent isles
of the Ionian and Egean seas from a northwesterly direction.[98] It
has been also argued “from the unmixed character of their language”
that they found the region uninhabited,[99] but there are reasons for
believing that it was sparsely populated by a non-Aryac people of the
Euscaric physical type.[100]

The separation of the Greeks from the southern Aryac stream took place
somewhere in the valley of the Danube, whence a portion of the original
Hellenes moved down the Adriatic into the Morea, and other bands known
as Carians, Leleges, Phrygians, etc., passed into Asia Minor.[101]
Even the island of Cyprus, close to the Syrian shore, appears to have
supported a Greek population previous to its occupancy by the Egyptians
and Semitic peoples.[102]

The Greek language has strong affinities to the ancient Persian and
Sanscrit, showing conclusively that the Aryac tribes whose descendants
developed these tongues dwelt in eastern Europe between the Slavonic
peoples on the north and the proto-Hellenes on the south. At a later
date, that is, about 1500 B. C., numerous Phenician colonists occupied
the shores of Greece, constructing the so-called “Cyclopean” walls, and
leaving a lasting impression, both on the language and culture of the
Aryac population.[103] Greek civilization undoubtedly derived its early
inspiration from Semitic and Hamitic sources, and nearly thirty per
cent. of the Greek roots are non-Aryac, proving a large admixture of
foreign thought and blood at some remote epoch.

The ancient Greek physical type was rather Slavonic than Celtic.
The skull was long (about 76), the forehead high, the nose narrow
and straight (the “Grecian nose”), the face oval and orthognathic,
the complexion fair, the hair blonde or chestnut, and the eyes blue
or grey.[104] The highest bodily symmetry of the human species was
reached among them, and its proportions were perpetuated for all time
in the noble products of Greek plastic art.

The modern Greeks have undergone extensive commingling with Slavonians,
Turks, Bulgarians, etc., so that the ancient type is no longer common,
and the population is generally darker in complexion, and the skull
more globular than in classic ages.

At a very remote epoch the Hellenic peoples occupied southern Italy
(Magna Grecia), Sicily, portions of southern France and the regions on
both shores of the Hellespont, their easternmost colonies extending
quite into Syria. During the middle ages the establishment of the
capital of the eastern empire at Constantinople, gave to Greek a
position in the east equal to that of Latin in the west. Crushed out,
first by the Romans and next by Mongolian hordes, within this century
the Hellenic peoples are rapidly regaining a prominent position. Their
settlements in Asia Minor are displacing the Turks, and in all the
cities of the Levant they form one of the most active elements of the
population.

In certain mental endowments, the Hellenic peoples won a position
far ahead of all others. The sense of artistic form was possessed by
them in a superlative degree; for the highest philosophic thought
they showed an aptitude unparalleled in the annals of the race; in
mathematics and mechanics, in poetry and the drama, in architecture and
in literature, they created models of such perfection that the later
generations of other nations have been content to do little more than
imitate them. To this day that culture which is properly called the
highest, must be based on a long and loving study of Greek art and
thought.


_5. The Lettic Peoples._

The Letts and Lithuanians, dwelling on the shores of the Baltic Sea,
partly in Prussia and partly in Russia, are unimportant peoples
politically, and indeed every way but ethnographically. In this
respect, however, they deserve particular attention, because in the
opinion of a number of modern writers they “have the best claim to
represent the primitive Aryac race.”[105] This claim is based on the
structure of their language, which seems to preserve characteristics
of an exceedingly primitive type, such for instance as a dual number,
numerous oblique cases, an archaic phonology;[106] and also on their
physical appearance, being tall blondes, with blue eyes, and moderately
long skulls (about 78°). Both in appearance and language they are
a connecting link between the Slavonic and Teutonic peoples. The
westernmost dialect of the group, the “old Prussian,” now extinct, was
spoken west of the Vistula, and perhaps extended to the coast of the
German Ocean. Their total number at present is not over 2,000,000.


_6. The Teutonic Peoples_

Separated from the Letto-Slavonians about the beginning of the Age of
Bronze (see above p. 152), and extended themselves toward central and
southern Germany, north into Scandinavia, and west along the shores of
the North Sea. Their most celebrated ancient tribes were the Goths and
Vandals, the Angles and Saxons, the Danes and Norsemen, the Franks and
Alemanni, the Lombards and the Burgundians. The modern nations which
with more or less justice are classed as of Teutonic descent, are the
German speaking population of the German and Austrian empires, the
States of Sweden and Norway, Denmark, Holland, western Switzerland and
England. It is needless to say that there is little purity of descent
in most of these lands; the highest is believed to be in Scandinavia.
There we find still in the ascendant the tall and muscular frame,
the fair hair and complexion, the blue eyes and full blonde beards
which the Greek and Roman writers agree in attributing to the dreaded
northern barbarians. The skull is long, the temperament lymphatic, and
the complete growth attained later than in the Celtic stock.[107]

The mental character of the Teuton is somewhat sluggish and material,
but is directed by clear insight and unconquerable pertinacity. His
conquests, whether on the field of battle or in the arena of the
intellect, have been attained by deliberate calculation and dogged
obstinacy. His clear judgment refuses to be controlled by the mere
dicta of authority. In the fourth century the Goths attached themselves
to the great Arian heresy, and a thousand years later their descendants
were the first to throw off the yoke of the Roman church. The
profoundest metaphysician of modern times, Emmanuel Kant, was a Teuton;
but his avowed purpose was to prove the futility of all metaphysical
speculation. The poets and dramatists of the Teutonic nations,
Shakespeare, Schiller, Goethe, were the first to break definitely with
the classical models, and vindicate the freedom of the artist.

Within the last century, the extension of this group over the globe
has left all others far behind. The German, the Englishman and the
Anglo-American now control the politics of the world, and their
contributions to every department of literature, science and the arts
have been the main stimuli of the marvellous progress of the nineteenth
century.


_7. The Slavonic Peoples._

In the early historic period there stretched a line of kindred
agricultural and nomadic tribes from the Baltic to the Black and
Caspian seas, forming the northern outposts of the Aryac stock, in
immediate contiguity with the Mongolian race. They were the Scythians,
Sarmatians, Massagetes, etc. Their languages belonged to what is called
the Slavonic group, and had a marked family likeness; but the physical
traits of the various tribes were then, as now, very various, and the
most that can be said is that the majority were blondes, with flaxen
hair, full beards and a tendency to dolichocephaly.[108]

These tribes were the ancestors of the numerous Slavonic peoples of the
present day, the Russians, Ruthenians, Poles, the Wends in Prussia,
the Czechs of Bohemia, the Bulgarians and Servians, the Montenegrins,
Dalmatians and Croatians. All these, and some smaller communities,
speak to-day Slavic dialects, though they are by no means all of
pure Slavic descent. There has been a constant intermingling with
the Mongolians, easily recognizable in physical traits and mental
character. Though early brought into contact with civilization, the
Slavonic peoples have been the last of all the Aryans to appreciate its
greatest benefits. Within a century, however, their progress has been
phenomenal, and, except the English people, no other nation within that
period has extended so widely the domain of enlightened governmental
control over half-savage tribes. The conquests of the Russians in
northern and central Asia have always been attended with beneficent
results for the conquered people, and nothing but the selfish jealousy
of other European governments has prevented these conquests from being
far more extensive and far more fruitful of good to mankind.

The Russian is laborious, submissive, dreamy, unpractical. The
individual is lost in the community, the _mir_, a communistic village
association of great antiquity. His religion is the merest formality,
relieved by outbreaks of fanaticism. Russian literature, which has
lately become the vogue in other nations, is introspective and
unhealthful, oriental in its spirit, occidental in its cravings.

The ancient Slavonic tribes had close relations with the Eranic
peoples, the Medes and Persians. The connecting link seems to have been
the Sigyni and Agathyrsi tribes, who dwelt south of the Carpathians,
in what is now Transylvania. Both of these claimed relationship to the
Medes, and when they were conquered by the Celtic Dacians, many of
them followed their cousin in Asia. They were not without culture, and
Herodotus speaks of them as loving luxury, and decorating themselves
with gold. Ornaments of this metal, worked with creditable skill,
are found in their graves, along with polished stone, implements and
fragments of pottery.[109]


_8. The Indo-Eranic Peoples._

The colony of the Aryans which pushed its way furthest to the east
was the Indo-Eranic. Its various dialects prove conclusively that its
ancestral tribe, when on European soil, occupied a position between
the Slavonic and Hellenic peoples, probably between the Danube and the
Egean Sea. Its latest contingent, the Armenian people, was a branch
of the Thracian Briges, and occupied their territory in Asia Minor
about 700 B. C. The main migration preceded them at least two thousand
years, and divided into two branches, one establishing its chief power
between the Caspian Sea and the Indian Ocean, the other crossing
the Hindu-Kusch range and gradually obtaining the chief control of
Hindostan. The former includes the Eranic, the latter the Indic groups
of the Aryac stock.

The ancient representatives of the Eranic peoples were the old
Bastrians and Persians. In the language of the former, sometimes called
_Zend_, their sacred book, the _Zend-avesta_, was written probably
about 500 B. C., and in the latter many cuneiform inscriptions are
preserved, dating somewhat later.

Their modern descendants are the Persians and Parsees, the tribes of
Afghanistan, Beluchistan, Kurdistan, and Luristan, and the Ossetes,
who dwell in the vales of the central Caucasus.[110] Most of these are
Mohammedans in religion, and in a backward condition of civilization.
Their physical appearance speaks of frequent intermixtures with
Mongolic and Semitic elements.

The ordinary rural population of Persia are called the Tadchiks.
They are diligent agriculturists, and devoted likewise to commercial
pursuits. In the latter capacity they are often met from Constantinople
to China. Their language is usually the modern Persian, an Aryac
dialect which has departed from the original inflectional standard
almost as much as the modern English. Those who live in Kaschgar,
however, speak Turkish, while retaining the physical traits of their
Aryac ancestry.

Modern Persian has developed an interesting literature, consisting
chiefly of poetry and works of imagination.

The Afghans and Beluchis are the nearest related to the Indian stock.
Their dialects are derived from the Sanscrit, and in appearance they
resemble the Indo-Aryans rather than the Persian. The assertion of some
ethnographers that they are of Semitic affinities has been disproved.
They are, however, mixed with Semitic and Dravidian blood. Although
historically established about their present locality since the days of
Alexander the Great, they retain faint traditions that their ancestors
came from the west, which has led some to suppose them of Syrian
extraction.[111] In religion they are generally fanatical Mohammedans,
and their nationality is a loose federation of independent clans.

The Indic branch of this colony entered Hindostan as late as 2000-1500
B. C. Its language was then as closely akin to the Bactrian as, say,
Italian and French are to-day. Its members were roving herdsmen, and
first occupied the valleys of the Punjaub, driving before them the
Dravidas, a non-Aryac folk, who had occupied the land. The priestly
class of these colonists were called Brahmans, their dialect Sanscrit,
and in this we have preserved from that remote epoch many religious
chants called the Rig Veda, committed to writing probably about 500 B.
C. The original tongue soon split up into many dialects, as the Pali,
the Prakrit and the modern Hindoostantee.

The population of the Indian peninsula to-day, who speak these dialects
and are more or less of Aryac blood, numbers nearly a hundred million.
They include the Rajpoots, the Djats, the Hindoos, the Hunzas, and
numerous other tribes and castes. The ubiquitous gipsies or Romany are
a wandering branch of these who left India as late as the twelfth or
thirteenth century, and have been roving over Europe ever since.

The earliest Indo-Aryans had undoubtedly retained many pure Aryac
traits. They were of medium height, oval faces, handsome regular
features, symmetrical in body, the skull dolichocephalic (about 77),
the complexion brunette but not brown, the eyes hazel, the hair wavy.
This is the type of the highest Brahmans to-day, and throughout all
their history they have exercised the utmost care to preserve it
intact. The institution of castes was undoubtedly established with
this object in view, the word for “caste,” _varna_, in Sanscrit meaning
“color.”

The mental aptitudes of the Indic immigrants are seen to advantage in
their rapid conquest of Hindostan, in the civilization they developed,
and in the vast literature which they created.[112] While in art and
philosophy inferior to the Greeks, they succeeded in one point far
beyond any other Aryac people, that is, in the formation of two of the
most successful religions of the world, Brahmanism and Buddhism. The
former, a pure pantheism, has been established nearly 4000 years, and
still can claim votaries; the latter, theoretically an atheism, to-day
has more believers than any other cult.


III. THE CAUCASIC STOCK.

The defiles and fastnesses of the Caucasus have been time out of mind
harbors of refuge for the defeated tribes of the neighboring regions.
Isolated in their secluded homes, in ceaseless warfare with their
neighbors, an astonishing diversity of type and language arose. When
the Romans undertook to explore these mountains, they had to call in
the aid of seventy interpreters! It is not surprising, therefore, that
we find communities there to-day, tribes apparently of Aryac lineage,
speaking agglutinative languages, and others, of Mongolic appearance,
quite unconnected with any Mongolic tongue. Divided as far as possible
by linguistic resemblances, the Caucasian peoples may be placed under
four groups:

1. The Lesghic, which includes the Avars, and people of Daghestan.

2. The Circassic, in which fall the Circasians proper, and others.

3. The Kistic, and

4. The Georgic, the principal members of which are the Georgians and
Mingrelians.

The physical types vary greatly, but it is well known that the brunette
beauties of Georgia have long been accounted among the handsomest women
of the race, and many of the men are remarkably noble in feature.
Intellectually, however, they have never taken a high rank.

Of them all, the Georgian tribes have the oldest culture, the
traditions reaching as far back as 1200 B. C., and some trustworthy
data as far as 700 B. C. They were among the early converts to
Christianity, and about the beginning of this century voluntarily
accepted the sovereignty of Russia.[113]

The Georgian girls have long been celebrated for their beauty, and
merit their renown; but they age very rapidly. The Circassian women
are also celebrated, but are less perfect beauties. Both have black
eyes and dark hair, the complexion a brunette sometimes to brownness.
The Circassian girls were those who principally supplied the harems of
Constantinople. They went willingly, and their families saw nothing
shameful in such a transaction.

Their traits and geographical location have gained for the Caucasians
the credit of being the oldest as well as the purest type of the white
race, which indeed has been often called the “Caucasian” race. Recent
archæological researches, however, have shown that the Caucasus was not
inhabited until the close of the neolithic period.[114] An examination
of the geological condition of these mountains proves that they were
covered with glaciers until a late period, especially on the southern
slope, and no vestige of human occupation previous to the neolithic
period has been found in this alleged cradle of the human race, and
pretended place of origin of some of our domestic animals.[115]



LECTURE VI.

THE AUSTAFRICAN RACE.

    CONTENTS.--Former geography of Africa. Area of characterization of
    the race. Its early extension. Divisions.

    I. THE NEGRILLOS. Classical tales of Pygmies. Physical characters.
    Habits. Relationship to Bushmen. Description of Bushmen and
    Hottentots.

    II. THE NEGROES. Home of the true negroes. 1. The Nilotic Group. 2.
    The Sudanese Group. 3. The Senegambian Group. 4. The Guinean group.

    III. THE NEGROIDS. Physical traits. Early admixtures. 1. The Nubian
    Group. 2. The Bantu group.

    GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE RACE. Low intellectual position. Origin
    of negroes in the United States; in Arabia.


We have seen that the African continent at the period of its first
occupancy was divided by the sea (now desert) of the Sahara into two
unequal portions, the northern being properly an appendix of Europe.
The southern portion began at the Mediterranean on the north, where the
tertiary plateau of Tripoli rises above the sea, included the valley
of the Nile above the Delta, and the remainder of the continent as it
now is, together with the island of Madagascar, with which it was then
connected by a land bridge. As the Sahara sea evaporated to become
a desert, its vast tracts and also the lower Nile valley and the
eastern coast nearly to the Equator were occupied by the Hamitic stock
of the white race. The remainder of the continent was in the possession
of the Austafrican or black race.


_Scheme of the Austafrican Race._

                        {1. Equatorial Group.     {Akkas, Tikkitikkis, Obongos, Dokos, Vouatoans,
                        {                         {  _Kimos_ of Madagascar.
  I. Negrillo Branch.   {
                        {2. South African Group.  Bushmen, Hottentots, Namaquas, Quaquas.

                        {1. Nilotic Group.        Shillaks, Dinkas, Bongos, Kiks, Baris, Nuers.
                        {2. Sudanese Group.       Haussas, Battas, Bornus, Kanoris, Ngurus, Akras.
  II. Negro Branch.     {3. Senegambian Group.    Serrerus, Banyums, Wolofs, Foys.
                        {
                        {4. Guinean Group.        {Ashantis, Dahomis, Fantis, Yorubas,
                                                  {  Mandingoes, Veis, Krus.

                        {1. Nubian Group.         {Nubas, Barabras, Dongolowis, Pouls, Tumalis,
                        {                         {  Nyam Nyams, Monbuttus.
  III. Negroid Branch.  {
                        {2. Bantu Group.          {Caffirs, Zulus, Bechuanas, Sakalavas, Damas,
                                                  {  Herreros, Suahelis, Ovambos, Bassutos,
                                                  {  Barolongs, Bengas, Duallas, Wagandas.

This race is divisible into three quite different types or branches,
resembling each other in possessing a very dark skin, black eyes,
woolly hair, a prognathic face, and generally a dolichocephalic
skull, but differing widely in many minor traits. These types are the
_Negrillos_, the _Negroes_, and the _Negroids_.

The general characteristics of the Austafrican race are the most
positively marked of any of the varieties of our species, and as it
is certainly the lowest in zoölogical analogies, by some writers it
has been considered the oldest of all. This reasoning is erroneous.
The black race developed quite locally, under the influence of intense
heat and humidity. Its original habitat must have been where alone its
purest representatives have always been permanently residing, that is,
on the lowlands of western central Africa, between the equator and
12° north latitude, and from lake Tchad to the Atlantic. The hot and
moist depression watered by the great river Niger, may be named as the
probable “area of characterization” of the distinctive physical type of
this race.

How far from this center was its maximum extension has been variously
estimated. There is no evidence that the blacks ever occupied the lower
Nile valley, the area of ancient Egypt. On the oldest monuments they
are represented as slaves, and the Egyptian type discloses no sign of
admixture with Negro blood. They occupied at one time the southern
oases of the Sahara, but their dominion never extended as far north
as Fezzan. The presence of Negro colonies and mixed breeds which is
visible in the northern oases, is owing to the importation of the
Soudanese as slaves, and also to the extensive migrations they are
still in the habit of making. I learned when visiting some of these
oases, that many black families are constantly moving from one to
another in pursuit of their various callings.

It is an historical fact that from the beginning of the Christian era
at least, and probably much longer, the whole of the southern Sahara
and the northern portion of the Niger valley have been under the
absolute control of the Berbers, members of the Eurafrican race. They
founded in those lands the extensive monarchies of Ghanata and Melle,
which maintained their supremacy through many centuries.

On the east it is not likely that the Negroes ever gained prolonged
control east of the White Nile. That portion of the continent between
this river and the Arabian gulf has been held by the same peoples since
the time the ancient Egyptians sent their trading ships to “the land
Punt,” the name under which they knew it; and these peoples were not of
the Austafrican type or race.

The general tendency of migration in central as in southern Africa, so
far as it can be traced in historic times, has been westerly and
southwesterly. The densest population has been near the Atlantic coast,
as if the various tribes had been crowded to the impassable barrier of
the ocean.

[Illustration: ETHNIC CHART OF AFRICA.]

Whether the basin of the Congo was ever held by the true Negro race,
is an undecided question. If so, they were completely driven thence
in proto-historic times. South of that region they certainly never
penetrated, as the Hottentot and Bushman type cannot be considered as a
derivative from the true Negro, but only as a descendant from a common
ancestor, unlike either, and is perhaps a much older member of the
family. Hence I shall begin the description of the race with


I. THE NEGRILLOS.

This diminutive form of the Spanish word _negro_, black, is applied
to an unusually small variety of the race, which by several careful
writers is believed to be the oldest of all the African varieties, and
at one time to have occupied the most of the continent. Herodotus and
other classical authors speak of the Pygmies of Ethiopia, and there is
sufficient evidence to show that in his day they dwelt in localities as
far north as the 18th degree of latitude.[116]

For a long time modern skepticism assigned these statements to the
realms of fable, but the rapid exploration of Central Africa in this
century proves their general correctness. Many travellers, especially
Du Chaillu, Schweinfurth, Stanley, and Emin Bey, have seen and
described these dwarfs, and a few of them have been brought to Europe.

At present they are not found more than two degrees north of the
equator, whence they extend southward into the territory of the
Congo. Their various tribes are known by different names, as Akkas,
Tikkitikkis, Batuas, Dokos, Obongos, Vouatouas, etc.

The height of the male is four feet six to eight inches, the body is
symmetrical and remarkably agile, the facial angle is exceedingly low
(about 60°-65°), the face markedly prognathic, the chin retreating, the
lips protruding, and the ears large and ugly. The color is not black,
but a dark reddish brown, and the skull has a tendency to a globular
form. The nose is flat (about 55°), and there is a strong odor to
the skin. The hair is woolly, and in tufts, and the body is covered
with coarse short hairs, “so that the surface feels like a piece of
felt.”[117]

These extraordinary people have no settled abodes, build no towns,
cultivate nothing. They depend entirely on hunting and fishing, and the
barter of the products of the chase to agricultural tribes. They are
skilful in the use of the bow, employing small poisoned arrows, and
also manufacture spears. Voracious cannibals and unerring marksmen,
they are looked on with dread by the negroes around them.

Of their religion we have no knowledge further than that they have an
extreme dread of strange objects, lest some malignant influence lurk in
them.

In the south of Africa we find another group of tribes, the Bushmen
and Hottentots, also of small stature, and in many respects resembling
the Akkas. They are equally far removed from the true negroes, and it
is the opinion of some very competent observers, notably the German
travelers, Schweinfurth and Fritsch, that all these dwarf tribes belong
to the same stock.[118] The objection to this chiefly is that the
Bushmen are often dolichocephalic, but so also are some of the Akkas,
and at any rate this consideration is not alone of sufficient weight to
be decisive. There is little doubt but that this dwarf stock extended
over Madagascar, where they were known as Quimos or Kimos, and are
believed still to exist in the southern part of the island.[119]

The Bushmen are much better known than the Akkas. They dwell in and
around the great Kalihari desert, usually in a half-famished condition,
and on the lowest social scale. They are wandering hunters, making use
of the bow and arrow, and are not cannibals.

The Hottentots are a mixture of the Bushmen and the Negroid-Bantu
tribes in their vicinity. They are taller than the Bushmen, better
nourished, and lead a pastoral life, possessing herds of cows and
fixed habitations. Their language is remarkable for the number of
its “inspirates,” or “click” sounds, to form which one must draw in
the breath, similar to some we use in urging horses. In form it is
agglutinative. In these respects and in others, it resembles the
dialects of the Bushmen, and those who are competent to speak on the
subject believe that both can be traced to a common source.[120]

The Hottentot is rather a hopeless case for civilizing efforts. He
hates profoundly work, either physical or mental, and is passionately
fond of rum and tobacco, or failing the latter, he will stupefy himself
by smoking the wild hemp. He is too indolent to attempt agriculture,
and is content to live on milk, raw roots, and the product of the chase.

Some of the English travellers, on the other hand, say the Hottentots
have as much wit as their neighbors, the Dutch boors! Certain it is
that before they were oppressed by the whites, they possessed herds of
cows, goats and sheep, dressed hides, dug wells, manufactured pottery,
in some places tilled the ground and built fixed villages or kraals.

The oft-repeated assertion that they are destitute of religion is,
like all such, utterly false. On the contrary, they have quite a
developed mythology, perform rites and say prayers. Their principal
deity is Tsunigoam, to whom they appeal as “the father of all things”
and “our master.” At the rise of certain stars they hold festivals in
honor of the gods of light, and they believe the spirits of the dead
wander about and should be placated.[121] Their cult, indeed, compares
favorably with that of classic Greece.


II. THE NEGROES.

The true Negroes of Africa are confined to what the Arabs call _Beled
es Sudan_, the Land of the Blacks, the Sudan, and adjacent parts. It
is therefore an error to look on that continent as mainly inhabited by
negroes. At least a third of it has always been principally peopled by
the whites, and another third by tribes not of pure negro stock. The
true negro type, such as I have described it in my first lecture (see
page 48), is scarcely seen in resident tribes south of the Equator or
north of the tropic of Cancer. Within that limit they may be divided
for purposes of study into four groups, the Nilotic, the Sudanese, the
Senegambian and the Guinean.


_1. The Nilotic Group._

These begin with the Changallas, east of Sennaar, in the Egyptian
Sudan, between the 10th and 15th degree of north latitude. To the
south of them along the White Nile are the Dinkas, the Chilluks, the
Nuers, Kiks, Baris, and other tribes. These are wholly black and in a
rudimentary stage of culture, depending chiefly on hunting and fishing.
They go naked, the women at most wearing little aprons. Some of them
are cannibals, and all are of savage dispositions. As a rule they are
tall and powerful, and brave in war.

The Nuers are spoken of as of fine physical traits, and building
handsome and durable houses. Their bows and arrows, and the helmets of
their warriors, resemble those depicted on ancient Egyptian monuments.
It is probable that they are of mixed blood, their hair being less
woolly than that of their neighbors. The Baris, who live on the White
Nile, are described as an intelligent people. They cultivate millet
and tobacco, understand the reduction of iron and copper from the ores
found in their country, and are skilful merchants, making long voyages
to exchange their wares.


_2. The Sudanese Group._

The Central Sudan is the site of the most important negro states, the
monarchies of Bornu, Bagirmi and Wadai. The two former are in the
fruitful depressions which surround Lake Tchad, a large fresh water
sea in the center of one of the most delightful tropical basins in the
world. The natives are known as Kanoris, Kanembus, Marghis, Haussas,
Biddumas, etc. They are true negroes, very black, and of strong body.

Further to the west commences the watershed of the Niger, the great
river of Central Africa, describing in its course a vast semicircle
more than two thousand miles in length. On its banks are numerous
kingdoms and some cities of magnitude, as Sansandig, with 30,000
inhabitants, and the better known Timbuctoo, with 20,000. Many of their
houses are built of sun-dried bricks, and an active commerce is carried
on. But it must be added that these houses and this commerce have been
created by the Arabs, Tauregs, and mixed races, not by the negroes
themselves. These are principally tillers of the soil, hunters, fishers
and warriors. They nominally govern the states of Gando, Sokoto,
Fellata and others, but Arab influence is visible everywhere, and the
beneficent results of the introduction of the Mahommedan religion in
this part of Africa is strongly attested even by English travellers.

The Haussas, the Todas, and the Tibbus, tribes near the border of the
desert, are principally of negro blood, but with a visible strain of
Hamitic descent in them. The last mentioned, indeed, should properly be
classed with the Berber stock.


_3. The Senegambian Group._

The country south of the Senegal river to the coast of Sierra Leone is
known as Senegambia, or the western Sudan. It is claimed by the French,
who own the shadow of a sway there. The tribes near the coast are the
Sereres, the Wolofs, the Baniuns, and many others, all in a low stage
of culture. To the east is the important nation of the Mandingoes,
occupying an extensive territory adjoining western Guinea on the
south, and stretching east to the heights near Timbuctoo.

The Wolofs present a pure type of the Negro race, perfectly
homogeneous, and, according to Dr. Tautain, it is impossible to find
among them a single physical character hinting at an admixture of
any other blood. Their faces are prognathic, and the women have the
projecting gluteal region, so marked a trait in the Austafrican. Their
language is agglutinative, and is an independent stock. Most of the
Wolofs are Mohammedans, and in social organization they maintain a
rigid system of castes, based principally on occupation.[122]

The principal divisions of the Mande or Mandingo nation are the
Mallinki, the Soninki, and the Bambaras. They are not so pure in
blood as the Wolofs, many among them having regular features, light
complexions, and straighter hair. These traits are doubtless owing to
their long contact with the Arabs and the Berbers, the latter of whom
have controlled their country more or less for two thousand years. They
are active in commerce, and cultivate the soil, the men working with
the women in the fields.


_4. The Guinean Group._

Most of the tribes of the coast of Guinea are in a condition of
savagery, and have deteriorated by their contact with the whites. The
petty kingdoms of Ashanti, Fanti, and Dahomey are heard of from time to
time in our newspapers as the scene of some particularly bloody rite
or massacre. For generations this was the central point of the slave
trade, and the encouragement it gave to devastating wars led to the
destruction of all progress. It is here, on what is called the Pepper
Coast, that we established the Republic of Liberia, where about 20,000
negroes from the United States are carrying out a moderately successful
experiment of returning to their native continent.


III. THE NEGROIDS.

A large portion of the African continent is occupied by tribes of dark
hue, but lacking some of the most prominent traits of the true negro.
These are the “Negroids,” who are probably the products of a long and
close fusion of the Negro with the Hamitic and Semitic types. Their
color is not black, but a dark, reddish, coppery brown; the hair is
crisp and frizzly, but not woolly; the nose is straight and better
formed than that of the negro; the lips are thick, the skull long, and
the peculiar odor of the negro is absent.

We find these traits in two groups, both of which unquestionably had
their historic origin along the Nile, above the first cataract, and in
the region drained by its tributaries--in other words, the locality
where for ten thousand years or more the Hamites and the Negroes have
been in constant contact.

We can only speculate on the numberless wars and marriages, on the
extensive slave trade and commercial intercourse which throughout this
period have blended the races into so many intermediate types that
it becomes impossible in many cases to say with which a given tribe
should be classified. To add to the confusion, a large Semitic element
was added at two epochs, one when the Abyssinian branch of the Semites
moved across from Arabia to occupy Abyssinia, the other when, under the
impulsion of the fanaticism of Islam, the Arabs followed up the Nile in
their proselyting campaigns.

The latter event began in the seventh century of our era and has
continued ever since. The former probably began in earnest in the
height of the power of the Himyaritic states of southern Arabia, which
we may roughly put at seven centuries before Christ. A century or two
later than this, negro tribes from the Sudan overran the decaying
cities of the upper Nile and established a temporary control along its
banks; and the emperor Diocletian induced many of them to settle as
far north as Assuan.[123] These various influences combined to produce
the numerous mixed types which one sees along the Nile, rendering its
ethnography peculiarly obscure.

Under the pressure of increasing population and external inroads, these
mixed peoples divided into two groups, one, the Nubian, remaining in
the original district, the other, the Bantu, removing to the south and
southwest.


_1. The Nubian Group_

Includes the Nubas proper, who are partly a mixed people, while some
of them are pure negroes from Kordofan; the Barabras, who dwell on
both sides of the Nile between the first and second cataracts; the
Fundjas and Bertas, further south; and the Monbuttus and Nyam Nyams,
or Sandehs, near Lake Victoria Nyanza, besides many tribes of less
note. Most of them are more or less agricultural, and live in small
villages. Their clothing is very slight, and many tattoo the skin.
The Sandeh and Monbuttu are cannibals, and even eat those who die of
disease. Nevertheless, they have a knowledge of metals, and are skilful
iron-smiths.

The physical appearance of most of these tribes differs equally from
the Arab and the negro. They are generally of medium stature with thin
limbs and flat feet. The hair is crisp, but not woolly, and the color
varies from a black to a white brown. The beard is meagre and the skin
hairless. The features are not of the negro cast, but assimilate rather
those of the European.

Most of them are agriculturists in a small way. They raise the “caffre
corn” and millet, and make some efforts to irrigate their fields where
it is necessary. Their dwellings are wretched huts, and their arts are
of the rudest.

Not many centuries ago there was a large number of so-called Christians
among them, but their religion seems to have left little impression on
their character.

At present they are professedly Mohammedans, but really either
fetichists or indifferent. Their morals are not well-spoken of, though
it is also said that the class with whom travellers usually come into
contact are not favorable specimens of the population--as is apt to be
the case everywhere.

The Puls, or Fellahs, and the Fans, who live to the west in the Sudan,
removed to the regions they now occupy from the Nile valley, and
belong to the Negroid type. They have made extensive conquests in the
vast unexplored country between Timbuctoo and the equator. Abstaining
from alcohol and tobacco, condemning music and dancing, and blindly
adhering to the precepts of the Koran, they are unpopular among their
negro neighbors, but have brought many of them under subjection. Their
occupations are both pastoral and agricultural, while as commercial
travellers, and wandering smiths, they roam from one end of the Sudan
to the other. They weave cotton cloth, tan and dye leather, and work
it into various articles of use which are widely celebrated for their
excellence, and in times past were among the most extensive slave
dealers of Central Africa.

The languages of this group belong to four diverse linguistic stocks,
all of the agglutinative character. It has been called the equatorial
family of central Africa. They are usually agreeable to the ear, the
verbs are simple, and the syntax not complicated.[124]


_2. The Bantu Group_

Occupies nearly the whole of Africa south of the equator, except the
territory of the Bushmen and Hottentots. It includes the Suahelis,
the Mazimbas and the Caffres on the east coast, the Sakalavas of
Madagascar, the Bechuanas west of the Caffres, the Zulus, and nearly
all the numerous tribes of the Congo basin, the Angola and Zambesi
rivers.[125]

Their ancestors at one period resided to the northeast, probably
somewhere in Ethiopia, where a prolonged fusion of Hamitic blood with
the genuine Negro produced their physical type. They are usually tall
and well built, the color is a dark coppery brown, the head is long
(74), the hair is frizzly, and the nose rather straight.

All the Caffre people are pastoral in habits, and have large herds of
cows. Agriculture is practised on a limited scale. Their temperament
is turbulent and warlike, and many of them are cannibals. Their social
organization is military, but slavery is unusual. Singular to say, they
do not know the bow and arrow, their weapons being the war-club and a
lance called an _assegai_. Their religion is a fetichism, and polygamy
is universal. On the whole, they are on a higher level of culture than
the Negroes of the Sudan. All the Bantu tribes are mono-glottic, that
is, they speak dialects traceable to one original stem. These have a
peculiar alliteration, and form their words by means of prefixes of
elements placed before the root, this being their special method of
agglutination. It is divided into three principal dialects, and is the
most widely extended of any of the African linguistic stocks, except
the Libyan.

The vast basin of the Congo river, including over two million square
miles, is now mostly included in the “Congo Independent State.” Its
native inhabitants are connected by language with the Negroids of the
Bantu group, and several of them retain traditions of their immigration
into the districts they now inhabit. The Waganda, for instance, report
that their ancestors came from the northeast, the Watuta and Masiti
from near the Zambesi river. Many of them are of a light, bright brown,
and are devoid of the peculiar odor of the true negro. All the tribes
from Lake Tanganyika to the Atlantic speak dialects manifestly akin.

They are divided into independent nations, some of large extent, and
are subject to chiefs, who rule with despotic power. Their religion is
fetichistic, and though they generally are agricultural, and possess a
certain degree of culture, cannibalism is or was frequent among them.
Slavery also existed in some of its most deplorable forms, and up to
a very recent date, if not still, there was a regular trade in young
slaves to be fattened, killed and eaten on certain solemn occasions.

_General Observations on the Race._--Although the true Negroes
occupied but a small portion of the African continent, the infusion
of their blood into their Hamitic and Semitic neighbors, resulting in
the Negroid type, was to such a degree that these mixed stocks became
assimilated in character much more to the black than to the white race,
and were brought approximately to the mental level of the former.

Neither the Negroes nor the Negroids ever carried out a conquest of
lands occupied by the Hamites or Semites. We have vague histories of
bloody wars on a large scale among themselves, and the erection of
apparently powerful monarchies, but which soon fell to pieces.[126]

The low intellectual position of the Austafrican race is revealed by
the facts that in no part of the continent did its members devise the
erection of walls of stone; that they domesticated no animal, and
developed no important food-plant; that their religions never rose
above fetichism, their governments above despotism, their marriage
relations above polygamy. It is true that many of them practise
agriculture and the pastoral life, but it is significant that the
plants which they especially cultivate, the “durra” or sorghum, millet,
rice, yams, manioc, and tobacco, were introduced from Asia, Europe or
America.[127] Their cattle and sheep are descended from the ancient
stocks domesticated by the Egyptians, and differ from those represented
on the early monuments of Assyria and India. The brick-built cities of
the Sudan were constructed under Arab influence, and the ruins of stone
towers and walls in the gold-bearing districts of South Africa show
clear traces of Semitic workmanship.[128] The knowledge of smelting and
forging iron is of ancient date throughout Africa, and they can temper
steel with skill, but the art of the smith is regarded as degrading,
and their long acquaintance with this most useful of metals has not
lifted them from a condition of barbarism.[129]

In many of the useful arts they reveal considerable skill. The weaving
of grass into mats and cloth, the tanning and working of leather, the
preparation of salt and soap, dyeing and pottery, are occupations which
are wide spread. The true negroes are passionately fond of music,
singing and dancing, and the invention of one instrument, the marimba,
which is played by beating wooden keys with a stick, is attributed to
them.

The tendency of the negro race in Africa is that which we observe among
negro children in the public schools of the United States. Their powers
develop quite as rapidly as those of white children up to a certain
point, up to the age of thirteen or fourteen; but then there comes
a diminution, often a cessation, of their mental development. The
physical overslaughs the psychical, and they turn away from the pursuit
of culture. They are unwilling to undertake, they are unequal to, the
more arduous intellectual tasks.

I have already remarked that the Austafricans never of their own
volition made any serious inroad into the territory of the white race.
Yet there are to-day probably more than twenty millions of them,
including the mulattoes, living among the whites, seven millions of
whom are in the United States. This extraordinary condition is the
result of the enormous deportation of the blacks as slaves, which has
been going on for thousands of years.

The origin of the negroes in the United States may be traced partly
by the physical appearance, partly by the few words of their mother
tongues which have survived the acquisition by them of the English
language. These words are generally connected with the Mande stem
of tongues spoken by the Mandingoes and their neighbors, whom I
have already referred to as dwelling in Senegambia and the Western
Sudan.[130] They were a nation of some importance, and having early
become in great part adherents of the Mohammedan faith, established
the monarchy of Melli, which in the thirteenth century extended from
Timbuctoo to the coast, and forced many of the subjected tribes to
learn the Mande tongue.


  _Scheme of the Asian Race._

               { 1. Chinese Group.      Chinese.

  I. Sinitic   { 2. Thibetan.           Thibetans, Ladakis, Nepalese, Bhotanese.
      Branch.
                                        { Birmese, Siamese, Annamese, Cambodians,
               { 3. Indo-Chinese Group. { Cochin-Chinese, Tonkinese.


                { 1. Tungusic Group.      Tungus, Manchus.

                { 2. Mongolic Group.      Mongols, Kalmucks.

  II. Sibiric   { 3. Tartaric Group.    { Turcomans, Yakouts, Turks (Osmanli),
       Branch.                          { Usbeck, Kirghis, Cossacks, Huns.

                                        { Finns, Lapps, Esthonians, Ugrians,
                { 4. Finnic Group.      { Magyars, Mordvins, Samoyeds, Ostyaks,
                                        { Voguls, Livonians, Karelians.

                { 5. Arctic Group.      { Chukchis, Koraks, Kamschatkans,
                                        { Namollos, Ghiliaks, Ainos.

                { 6. Japanese Group.      Japanese, Koreans.



LECTURE VII.

THE ASIAN RACE.

    CONTENTS.--Physical geography of Asia. Physical traits of the Race.
    Its branches.

    I. THE SINITIC BRANCH. Sub-divisions. 1. The Chinese. Origin
    and early migrations. Psychical elements. Arts. Religions.
    Philosophers. Late migrations. 2. The Thibetan Group. Character.
    Physical traits. Tribes. 3. The Indo-Chinese Group. Members.
    Character and culture.

    II. THE SIBIRIC BRANCH. Synonyms. Location. Physical appearance.
    1. The Tungusic Group. Members. Location. Character. 2. Mongolic
    Group. Migrations. 3. The Tartaric Group. History. Language.
    Customs. 4. The Finnic Group. Origin and migrations. Physical
    traits. Boundaries of the Siberic Peoples. The “Turanian” theories.
    5. The Arctic Group. Members. Location. Physical traits. 6. The
    Japanese Group. Members. Location. History. Culture. The Koreans.


If you observe the relief of the continent of Asia, you will note
that from the lofty plateau of Pamir, called by the orientals “The
Roof of the World,” two tremendous mountain chains diverge, the one
to the northeast, finally reaching the sea of Ochotsk, the other to
the southeast, meeting the southern ocean on the west of the bay of
Bengal. The region between them is one of high and arid table lands,
intersected by mountain ranges, and giving birth to streams which flow
in circuitous courses to the eastern sea. Along the coast the land
sinks to alluvial plains, and north of this triangle, the endless
forests, steppes, and “tundras” of Siberia and Turkestan continue to
the Arctic sea.

The region thus described is the continent of Asia in the proper
geological and zoölogical sense; the valleys of the Oxus, of
Mesopotamia, and the land to the west of them, properly belong to
Europe, and in fact, are included by naturalists in that continent,
under the name “Eurasia.”[131]

Asia proper is thus divided into two contrasted geographical areas,
that of the table-lands and mountains on the south, and that of the
plains on the north. These features have been decisive in directing
the migrations of its inhabitants, and to some extent in modifying
their traits. The vast majority, however, are distinctly recognizable
members of one race, which has been variously termed the Asiatic, the
Mongolian, or the Yellow race.

_Physical Traits of the Asian Race._--As the last mentioned adjective
intimates, the prevailing color is yellowish, tending in different
regions toward a brown or white, but never reaching the clear white of
the western European. The hair is straight, coarse and black, abundant
on the head, scanty on the face, almost absent on the body. The
stature is medium or undersized, the legs thin, and the muscular power
inferior to that of the Eurafrican race. The skull has a tendency to
the globular form (meso- or brachycephalic), the face is round, the
cheek bones prominent, the nose flat at the bridge and depressed at the
extremity, the eyes are small and black, and the lids do not open fully
at the inner angle, giving the peculiar appearance known as the oblique
or Mongolian eye. This last trait is not uncommon in the children of
Europeans, but it is generally outgrown. It is in the adult an arrest
of muscular development, although in some instances it seems related to
the bony confirmation of the orbit.[132]

[Illustration: ETHNIC CHART OF EURASIA AND ASIA.]

_Subdivisions._--These are the general traits of the Asian race,
recurring more or less prominently wherever its members of pure descent
are found. It is divisible, however, into two branches, corresponding
roughly with the two geographical divisions of the continent to which I
have alluded. The first of these branches I call the Sinitic, from the
old Greek form of the word China, the other the Sibiric, an adjective
from the proper orthography of the name Siberia (Sibiria). These
branches are contrasted not only in geographical location, but quite
as much so in language. The Sinitic peoples speak isolating, tonic,
monosyllabic languages, while the tongues of the Sibiric population are
polysyllabic and agglutinative.


I. THE SINITIC BRANCH.

This branch includes the people of the Chinese empire and Farther
India. They are separable into three groups:--

1. The Chinese proper;

2. The Thibetans; and

3. The Indo-Chinese of Siam, Anam, Burmah, and Cochin China.

The languages of all these have peculiar features and such affinities
that they all point to one ancestral stock.


_1. The Chinese._

The population of China as we know it at present is the result of a
fusion of a number of tribes of connected lineage. Those who claim
the purest blood relate that somewhere about five thousand years ago
their ancestors came from the vicinity of the Kuen-lun mountains,
east of the Plateau of Pamir, and following the head waters of the
Hoang-ho and Yang-tse-Kiang entered the northwestern province of China,
Shen-si. Here they found a savage people, the Lolo and the Miaotse,
whom they subjected or drove out, and pursuing the river valleys,
reached the fertile lowlands along the coast. Their authentic annals
begin about 2350 B. C. Even then they had attained a respectable stage
of civilization, being a stable population, devoted to agriculture,
acquainted with bronze, possessing domestic animals, and constructors
of cities. The hoariest traditions speak of the cultivation of the “six
field fruits,” which were three kinds of millet, barley, rice, and
beans. The sorghum, wheat, and oats now common in parts of China are of
comparatively recent introduction.

It is interesting to inquire whether these ancient arts possessed by
the Chinese were self-developed, or were borrowed in part from the
Eurafrican peoples of Iran or Mesopotamia. The former opinion is that
defended by Peschel and some other ethnographers. They claim that the
culture of the Chinese was developed independently in the secluded
and fertile valleys of their great rivers, and owed nothing to the
evolution of other civilizations until commerce and travel brought them
together within historic times. The individual character of Chinese
ancient culture speaks strongly for this view; certainly the Chinese
system of writing is one based entirely on their range and method of
thought; their domestic animals are of varieties formerly unknown in
western Asia; and the growth of many undoubted local industries, silk
for instance, for which they were celebrated in the days of the prophet
Ezekiel, prove an ancient capacity for self-development not inferior to
the Eurafrican race.

On the other hand, their astronomical system, which was in use 2300 B.
C., is practically identical with that of the Arabs and Indo-Aryans,
and points for its origin to the Chaldees of Babylonia. In later
days, that is, since the beginning of our era, undoubtedly much that
has been looked upon as the outcrop of Chinese culture is due to the
Indo-Aryans. My own conclusion is that in all important elements
the ancient Chinese civilization was a home product, a spontaneous
growth of an intellectually gifted people, but one whose capacity of
development was limited, and that later generations were satisfied to
borrow and appropriate from the nations with whom commerce brought them
into contact.

This insufficiency of development is the weak point of Chinese
character, and is strikingly illustrated by the little use they made
of important discoveries. They were acquainted as early as 121 A. D.
with the power of the magnet to point to the north; but the needle was
never used in navigation, but only as a toy. They manufactured powder
long before the Europeans, but only to put it in fire-crackers. They
invented printing with movable type in the eleventh century, but never
adopted it in their printing offices. They have domesticated cattle for
thousands of years, but do not milk the cows nor make butter. Paper
money has been in circulation for centuries, but the scales and weight
still decide the value of gold and silver, coins of these precious
metals being unknown. Their technical skill in the arts is astonishing,
but the inspiration of the beautiful is wholly absent.

These historic facts disclose the psychical elements of Chinese
character. Its fundamental traits are sobriety, industry, common sense,
practicality. The Chinaman regards solely what is visibly useful,
materially beneficial. His arts and sciences, his poems and dramas, his
religions and philosophies, all revolve around the needs and pleasures
of his daily life. Such terms as altruism, the ideal, the universal,
have for him no sort of meaning, and an explanation of them he would
look upon as we do on the emptiest subtleties of the schoolmen--a
_chimera bombinans in vacuo_. Such an action as the martyr dying to
atone for the sins of others he could understand only as the action of
a deranged mind.

Their mental character is well shown in their religions. Originally,
the Chinese combined a simple worship of the powers of nature with that
of the spirits of their ancestors. The principal deity was Tien, the
Heaven or Sky, in union with whom was the Earth, and from this union
all nature proceeded. This natural and sexual dualism extended through
all things. The affairs of life are governed by countless demons and
spirits, whose tempers should be propitiated by offerings and prayers.
Days and seasons are auspicious or the reverse, and most of the rites
at present in use are divinatory rather than devotional.

The Buddhist religion was introduced into China about two centuries
before Christ, and was officially recognized as a state cult by the
Emperor Ming-ti in the year 65 A. D. Its spirit is, however, quite
different from the Buddhism of Ceylon, as it has degenerated into a
polytheism, a worship of the Bodhisattvas, or saints who have reached
the highest stage of perfection, and might enter Nirvana, but do
not, out of compassion for men. In general, it may be said that the
philosophical and moral principles taught in the Buddhistic classics
are not known and would not be admitted as representing their faith by
Chinese Buddhists.[133]

The teachings of the celebrated philosopher, Confucius (Con-fu-tse),
which are a substitute for religion among the most intelligent Chinese,
are in reality wholly agnostic. He declined to express himself on any
question relating to the gods or the possible after life of the soul,
asserting that the practical interests of this life and the duties of
a man to his family and the state are numerous enough and clear enough
to occupy one’s whole time. When asked for some model or code of such
duties, he replied by the sententious expression “When you are chopping
out an axe-handle, the model is near you,” meaning that it is in the
hand, and that in a similar manner in practical life we always have the
rule of right action in our own mind, if we choose to look for it.

The second great philosopher of China was Lao-tse, who lived in the
generation following Confucius (about 500 B. C.). His doctrine was
pantheistic and obscure, and his writings are considered the most
difficult to decipher of all the old Chinese classics. Nor can his
doctrine be called a religion. It was rather a mystical speculation
on the universe. All-Being, he taught, is born of Not-Being, and
existence, therefore, is an illusion.

Practically, all religions are looked upon as equally true. The
Confucian will frequent the Buddhist temples, and the Buddhist priest
will perform rites in the “house of reason,” as the Confucian holy
place is termed; or he will distribute tracts for the Christian
missionaries. The government is absolutely neutral in all religious
questions, and the persecutions which have been carried on against the
Christian missionaries have not been the promptings of fanaticism, but
dislike of foreigners and suspicion of their intentions. The official
documents of the Chinese government speak with equal contempt of every
form of religion, and the rulers would never dream of interfering in
any such question.[134]

Many of the Chinese are Mohammedans, Islam having been introduced
by sea and land within the first century of the Hegira. The Chinese
converts learn to repeat the Koran in Arabic, as it has not been
translated into their tongue; but few understand much of it. Their
rites and doctrines are learned by the verbal instruction of their
religious teachers. The Chinese Mohammedans, however, recognize as
their chief ruler the Khalif or Sultan, and not the Emperor at Pekin,
and hence the bloody revolutions which have from time to time broken
out among them.

Christianity was introduced by the Nestorians in the eighth century,
and now may be freely taught in any part of the realm. It has, however,
had little success. There are perhaps half a million Roman Catholic and
Protestant members. They belong to the lowest classes, and can occupy
no official position, owing to the conflict of their dogmas with the
teachings of Confucius and the agnostic principles of the government.

Within the last generation or two the Chinese have displayed an
unwonted desire for emigration. They have swept down in hundreds of
thousands on the islands of Malasia, Australia, the Sandwich Islands,
Mexico, and the United States. We have as a nation felt so impotent
before them that, in open contradiction to the principles of our
government we have closed our ports to them, and warned them from
our shores. This feeble and ignoble policy is a disgrace to us. Far
better to admit them, and to train earnest men among us in the Chinese
language and customs, so that these foreigners could be brought to a
knowledge of the superiority of our religions and institutions, and
thus be united with us in the advancement of mankind.


_2. The Thibetan Group._

The mountain-ringed land of Thibet is an arid region from 10,000 to
20,000 feet in height, thickly inhabited by a people whose principal
interests in life are religious. It is the centre of northern Buddhism,
and at the holy city of Lhasa the living incarnation of the founder
of that cult is supposed to live. In the numerous monasteries, some
on almost inaccessible mountain sides, tens of thousands of monks
pass their lives in religious exercises. They are vowed to celibacy,
and throughout the land it is looked upon as a distinct degradation
to marry. The natural result is that the relations of the sexes are
relaxed, and their morals debased. Polygamy is not uncommon, and in
Thibet, more than anywhere else, we find the peculiar institution of
polyandry, where a woman has two, three or four recognized husbands.
It is usual for several brothers thus to have the same wife.

The women are small but well made, and exercise an unusual control in
the affairs of life. The physical traits of both sexes are Mongolian,
though the eyes are rarely oblique. The culture is rather low, the
Thibetan not being an ardent agriculturist, but preferring the pastoral
life. He milks his cows and makes butter, which with hides and fleece,
leather and some local fabrics, are his principal articles of trade.

In the Himalayan valleys to the south are several nations in which the
Asian blood dominates, such as the Ladakis of Cashmere, the Nepalese,
the inhabitants of Bhotan and numerous others. They are generally mixed
with Dravidian or Aryac blood, but speak dialects of the Sinitic type.


_3. The Indo-Chinese Group._

The regions we call Farther India and Cochin China are at present
inhabited by peoples speaking tonic, monosyllabic languages, who are,
however, generally of mixed descent. Some of them have crimpled hair
and a dark complexion, suggesting the presence of some Nigritic blood;
others have features more Aryac than Mongolian, hinting at an ancient
fusion of Hindoostanee strains. These form the modern nations of Birma,
Siam, Annam, Cambodia, Tonkin, and Cochin China.

The Birmans have a well marked round head (about 83°), oblique eyes,
prominent cheek bones, and are of medium stature and sturdy. Their
color is a brownish yellow or olive. In religion they are Buddhists,
but they are by no means celebrated for honesty and morality. By a
curious freak of fashion, the dress of the women is open in front, but
it is the height of immodesty to show the naked foot.

The Siamese call themselves “Thai,” under which designation come also
the Laos. They are a mild mannered people, without much energy, but
willing to be taught.

The Annamese and Tonkinese are somewhat superior in culture to their
neighbors, and of well marked Asiatic physiognomy. The Cambodians,
called Khmers, are a mixed people, descended partly from Mongolian
ancestry, partly from Dravidian and Aryac conquerors who occupied their
country about the third century, and left behind remarkable vestiges of
their presence in ruins of vast temples and stone-built palaces.


II. THE SIBIRIC BRANCH.

The branch of the Asian race which I have called the Sibiric, as
geographically designating its pre-historic home, has also been called
the Turanian, the Ural-Altaic, the Finno-Ugric, the Mongolic, etc. Its
geographical location is north of the Altai range, and the Caspian and
Black seas, and from the Pacific to the Atlantic ocean. The languages
of all its members are polysyllabic and agglutinative, contrasting as
much with the Sinitic stock on the one hand as with the Aryac on the
other. In physical appearance individuals of reasonably pure descent
present good specimens of the Asian type, the skull brachycephalic,
the face round, the nose flat at the root, the eye small and black,
the hair straight and coarse, the color yellowish. They are divided
into many tribes, most of whom were until recently addicted to a
wandering pastoral life, and though on the lower levels of culture and
without coherent social bonds, they have at times loomed up as the most
powerful and pretentious figures in the history of the world.

Furthest to the east is


_1. The Tungusic Group_,

Which occupies the coast from the northern boundary of China to
Kamschatka, and westward to the Yenissei river. It embraces the Manchus
and the Tungus. The former, a bold hardy people, possessed themselves
of the throne of China early in the seventeenth century, and continue
to rule it by a military despotism, adapted with consummate skill to
the peculiarities of Chinese character. This has led to an extensive
fusion of Sinitic blood among the Manchus, and also an improvement in
their social status. They have become Buddhists, and their language is
losing ground before the Chinese.

The Tungus to the north of them, inhabiting a vast district of forest,
swamp and mountain, east of the Yenissei river, are of ruder life.
They depend for subsistence on the chase and on their large herds
of reindeer. In religion they adhere to the worship of the powers of
nature, and are under the control of their priests or “shamans.” They
present a well marked Asiatic type, a brachycephalic skull (81°), round
face and oblique eyes, the hair coarse and straight, the beard scanty.
In stature they are of medium height, strongly built, and the senses of
sight and hearing unusually keen.

Like most nations dwelling in or near the Arctic zone, the disposition
of the Tungus is decidedly cheerful and affable. He is hospitable to
strangers, and honorable in his dealings. In habits, however, he has
no notion of cleanliness, and the Tatar name applied to him--_tongus_,
hog--expresses what his not over-nice neighbors think of his mode of
life.

The tribes were subjected to the Russian domination about 1650, and
have been gradually improving their condition. A portion of them called
Lamuts reside on the sea of Ochotsk, and have fixed villages with
houses built in the Russian style.[135]


_2. The Mongolic Group_

had their original home in Mongolia, a vast arid country south of the
Altai range, and west of Manchuria. Before the Christian era they had
extended north beyond the mountains and occupied the land around Lake
Baikal, whence they proceeded easterly, and under the name of Kalmucks
have settled quite to the river Volga. Few of them are agriculturists,
it being their preference to wander over the pastures with their
flocks. Their religion is a debased form of Buddhism grafted on their
ancient fetichism. In physical type they are true Asiatics, and are of
a restless, warlike disposition.

In the extended region which they inhabit, stretching over seventy
degrees of longitude, they have had space to multiply until their
numbers once became a menace to all other nations of the Eurasian
continent. Under Genghis Khan, in the beginning of the thirteenth
century, they poured down in countless hordes on the cultivated nations
of Asia and Europe, and in a few years established a monarchy, the
then greatest in the world. About a century later his descendant, the
sanguinary Tamerlane, swept Asia from the Indian Ocean to the Arctic
circle; and at the close of yet another century Baber, of the same
redoubted lineage, founded the empire of the Great Mogul (Mongol) in
India, extending from the Indus to the Ganges. Based, however, on
despotism, barbarism and fanaticism, these gigantic states disappeared
in a few generations, leaving scarcely a trace of their existence
except the ruins of the higher civilizations which they had destroyed.


_3. The Tataric Group._

Derived its name from the Chinese word _ta-ta_, and is incorrectly
written _Tartar_. Another Chinese name applied to them was _Tu-kiu_,
from which is derived our word “Turk.”

The earliest home of the Tatars or Turks was in Turkestan, north of the
Plateau of Pamir and in the immediate vicinity of the Persian Aryans.
Long before the beginning of the Christian era their predatory bands
had repeatedly invaded the territory of the Aryans and the Semites,
and quite down to two centuries ago the states which they had founded
were looked upon with dread by the mightiest potentates of Europe. The
Chinese annals speak of their inroads into that empire more than 200
years before our era.

At the period of the migration of nations which accompanied the
dismemberment and fall of the Roman Empire, the Tatars appeared
frequently in Europe, always as ruthless devastators. Attila, “the
scourge of God,” with his bands of Huns, the Avari, and the Bulgari,
who followed in his wake, the Turcomans and the Cossacks, and finally
the Osmanli Turks whose descendants now govern European and Asiatic
Turkey, and whose Sultan is the political head of the Mohammedan world,
all belong in this group.

It is needless to say that in these rovings they have undergone much
admixture. The modern Turk has more of the blood of the Semite and the
Circassian in his veins than of his Tartar ancestors; but his language
has maintained a singular purity, and the Tartar hunter, the Jakout,
in the delta of the Lena on the frozen ocean, finds no difficulty in
understanding its ordinary expressions. The Jakout speaks indeed the
purest and most ancient form of the idiom, “The Sanscrit of the Tatar,”
as it has been called by Friedrich Müller.

The peculiarity of this language is that it has a law of vocalic
harmony, by which the various suffixes added to the root change the
vowels they contain in accordance with the vowel of the root. It has
not only a pleasing sound, but superior flexibility and an unusual
capacity to express fine shades of meaning. It is, however, losing
ground both in Europe and Asia, as are all the agglutinative languages.

Next to the Turks, the Cossacks and Kirghis Tatars are prominent
members of the stock. They are closely related, being branches of the
same dialectic family. The former wander over the steppes between the
Sea of Aral and the main chain of the Altai. It is not known when they
occupied this region, but it was within historic times, and they drove
from it a people of higher civilization, acquainted with the use of
bronze and brass, and dwellers in cities.[136] The Kirghis themselves
build no houses, but dwell in felt tents called “yourts.” They did not
cultivate the soil, deriving their food from their flocks and herds,
but of late years have begun a careless agriculture. In religion they
profess Mohammedanism, but in reality they cling to their ancient
Shamanistic superstitions.


4. _The Finnic Group_

Has lived for certainly two thousand years or more in Northern Europe.
It is mentioned by Tacitus, and its traditions as well as its dialects
support this antiquity. That it ever extended, as many theorists
pretend, into Central or Southern Europe, may now be dismissed as an
obsolete hypothesis, disproved by craniological studies and a closer
scrutiny of the alleged linguistic resemblances which have been urged.
The probability is that the Finns and Lapps had the same ancestors as
the Samoyeds of Northern Siberia, who once lived on the upper streams
of the Yenissei in the Sajanic mountains and around Lake Baikal. The
Laplanders are said still to retain some reminiscence of the migration,
and the verbal affinities of the Finnic and Samoyedic demonstrate an
early relationship.[137]

The eastern members of the group are the Ugrians in the government of
Tobolsk, some tribes on the Volga, and the Permians on the Kama river
(an affluent of the Volga). The Magyars of Hungary are a branch of the
Ugrians who possessed themselves of the land in the ninth century, and
who still retain their language, not remote from the Finnish.

The present Finnland was first occupied by the Lapps or Laplanders,
who were driven northward and westward by bands continually arriving
from the east. The Finns, who call themselves “Suomi,” which is the
same as the initial syllables of “Samo-yed,” are subdivided into the
Esthonians and Livonians on the Baltic, south of the Gulf of Finland,
the Tavastes, Karelians, and others to the north.

The physical type of the members of the Finnic group has given
rise to much discussion. Many individuals are blondes, with light
hair and eyes, and with dolichocephalic skulls. Such are especially
numerous among the Esthonians, Karelians, and Tavastes. But it must
be remembered that for two or three thousand years these tribes have
been in contact with the blonde and dolichocephalic type of the Aryans,
represented by the ancient Teutonic and Slavonic groups (see Lect. V).
It is not in the least surprising therefore to find the Finnic group
everywhere deeply infused with Aryac blood. Even the remote Lapps are
no exception. Nominally there are 25,000 or more of them. But Prince
Roland Bonaparte says as the result of his recent observations among
them, “Pure Lapps no longer exist;”[138] and when this is true of that
isolated people, how much more is it of the tribes in closer proximity
to the Eurafrican race? We may conclude with Professor Keane that the
genuine traits of the Finnic group are “fundamentally and typically
Mongolic,” _i. e._, Sibiric.[139]

There is no reason to suppose that any of the Sibiric peoples extended
southerly in Asia or Europe much beyond their present boundaries.
It has been a mania with many ethnographers, especially linguistic
ethnographers, to discover “Turanian” peoples and dialects in
numerous parts of southern and central Europe. They would have it
that the Basques, the Etruscans, the Ligurians, the Pelasgians,
were “Turanian;” that the prehistoric inhabitants of Palestine, the
Hittites, and the Shepherd Kings of Egypt, were also of this ilk. They
are like those other ethnographers who find “Mongoloid” indications
everywhere, in America, in Polynesia, even among the Bushmen of South
Africa. As Friedrich Müller says of these writers, “Mongolian” is a
sack into which everything is crammed by them. There is no true science
in catching at superficial resemblances or exalting remote analogies
while fixed distinctions are disregarded.


_5. The Arctic Group._

In northeastern Siberia, close to the Arctic circle, and occupying the
territory between the Pacific and Arctic oceans, dwell a number of
tribes in a condition of barbarism. Their languages are in general form
of the Sibiric type; their physical traits vary, indicating frequent
admixture. In color they are rather dark, and the skull is generally
slightly dolichocephalic.

Of these the Chukchis occupy the extreme northeast of the continent.
Nordenskjold, who saw much of them, considers them the mixed
descendants of various tribes, driven from more hospitable regions to
the south.[140] Some of them have a marked Mongolic aspect, but the
majority differ from that type. They are yellowish-brown in color,
prominent nose, tall in stature, and well built. They are active
hunters and fishermen. The Namollos are a sedentary branch of the
Chukchis, and both are related to the Koraks and Kamschatkans. The
Namollos live along the Arctic coast, near East Cape, while the Koraks
live to the south. “Kora” means “reindeer,” and they are essentially
the reindeer people, that useful animal being their chief wealth.
Close to East Cape, and southward along the coast of Behring sea, are
Eskimo tribes. They have lived there from the first discovery of the
coast, and doubtless long before. Indeed, as far as tradition goes, the
movements of the Eskimos have been from America into Asia, and not the
reverse, until they were driven back by the advancing Chukchis.[141]

The Kamschatkans to the south are of small stature, but strongly
formed. They live upon fish, and are skillful in the use of dogs for
sleds. They number only about 2000 souls, and are disappearing.

The Ghiliaks live near the mouth of the Amoor river and on the Saghalin
islands. They are a mixed people, the cephalic index varying from 74
to 85; some of them have abundant beards, which is very rare among the
pure Asiatics.[142]

The Aleutians, who occupy the long chain of islands reaching from
Kamschatka to Alaska, are of medium height, flat nose, black eyes and
hair, and mesocephalic. They belong to the American, not to the Asian
race.

Most of these peoples speak tongues differing widely among themselves,
but of the agglutinative type. They are in no way related to the
American languages, and are equally remote from the Mongolian.


_6. The Japanese Group._

The Japanese cannot claim purity of descent. Their complexion and
frequent crisp or wavy hair indicate that their Asian origin has been
modified by other blood. They were not the earliest inhabitants of the
archipelago they occupy, but moved into it probably about a thousand
years before the Christian era.[143] The immigrants seem from some
linguistic evidence to have come from Manchuria or Mongolia, and to
have found upon the islands a different people, the Ainos (properly
Ainu) remarkable for their heavy beards and hairy persons. These have
now been driven to the northernmost portion of the archipelago, where
about 1200 of them still reside. It was long thought that the languages
of the Ainos and Japanese have some affinities, but except in loan
words and a general phonetic resemblance, this has now been disproved.
The Ainos seem physically related to the Ghiliaks, and came from the
north and west. They are supposed to have been the first occupants of
the Kurile islands.

Like other mixed peoples, the Japanese vary so much in height, form of
skull, hue and bodily proportion, that it is impracticable to set up
any fixed type for them, further than to say that their general Asiatic
aspect is usually unmistakable to the trained eye.[144] In mental
qualities they are gifted, being intelligent, artistic, brave, kind,
and honorable, fully alive to the benefits of a high civilization,
and able to accept with profit all that the western world has to
offer.[145] They are monogamists, and the position of woman has always
been respected among them. The prevailing religion is the Shintoism
or worship of the powers of nature, but Buddhism, introduced in the
7th century, has also many votaries. At heart, however, they are an
irreligious people, like the Chinese, and are unconcerned about the
ideal and the mystical. Many of their arts, like that of writing,
were at first learned from the Chinese; but they have improved upon
them, and given them other directions, as in the development of their
phonetic from the Chinese syllabic alphabet.

Japanese art has attracted in recent years the admiration of the
European world, and many motives in it have been accepted by our
lovers of decorative effects. It is indeed wonderful in its technical
finish, and its theory of composition has novelties which are worthy of
imitation, but it is devoid of that something which we call the ideal;
and its canon of proportion of the human body has never been developed
to approach the classical models.

There is an extensive literature in the Japanese tongue. Most of it
deals with practical subjects, and even the poetry is usually didactic
in spirit.

The Koreans seem originally to have come from the same stock as the
ancestors of the Japanese. They are of more positive Asiatic type, and
are a mixed people, the ruling class (the Kaoli) having conquered the
peninsula in the second century before our era. They closely resemble
the Loochoo islanders, and doubtless are consanguine with them. Their
industries are similar to those of Japan, which country, indeed,
obtained many of its arts from China by way of the Korean peninsula.



LECTURE VIII.

INSULAR AND LITTORAL PEOPLES.

    CONTENTS.--Variability of islanders and coast peoples. Physical
    geography of Oceanica. Ethnographic divisions.

    I. THE NEGRITIC STOCK. Subdivisions. 1. The Negritic Group.
    Members. Former extension. Physical aspect. Culture. 2. The Papuan
    Group. Location. Physical traits. Culture and language. 3. The
    Melanesian Group. Physical traits. Habits. Languages. Ethnic
    affinities of Papuas and Melanesians.

    II. THE MALAYIC STOCK. Location. Subdivisions. Affinities with the
    Asian Race and original home. 1. The Western or Malayan Group.
    Physical traits. Character. Extension. Culture. Presence in
    Hindostan. 2. The Eastern or Polynesian Group. Physical traits.
    Migrations. Character and culture. Easter Island.

    III. THE AUSTRALIC STOCK. Affinities between the Australians and
    Dravidians. 1. The Australian Group. Tasmanians and Australians.
    Physical traits. Culture. 2. The Dravidian Group. Early extension.
    Members. Culture. Languages.


Before proceeding to the ethnography of the American continent, I would
have you take a rapid survey of the inhabitants of that extensive
archipelago whose islands are thickly dotted in the Indian and Pacific
oceans, and ascertain as far as may be the relationship in which they
stand to the population of the adjacent coasts.

  _Scheme of Insular and Littoral Peoples._

                     { 1. Negrito Group.      { Mincopies, Aetas, Schobaengs,
                                              { Mantras, Semangs, Sakaies.

  I. Negritic Stock. { 2. Papuan Group.         Papuas, New Guineans.

                                              { Natives of Feejee Islands, New
                     { 3. Melanesian Group.   { Caledonia, Loyalty Islands, New
                                              { Hebrides, etc.


                                              { Malays, Sumatrese, Javanese,
                     { 1. Malayan Group.      { Battaks, Dayaks, Macassars,
                                              { Tagalas, Hovas (of Madagascar).
  II. Malayic Stock.

                     { 2. Polynesian Group.     Polynesians, Micronesians, Maoris.


                     { 1. Australian Group.   Tasmanians, Australians.

  III. Australic
         Stock.
                                             { Dravidas, Tamuls, Telugus,
                     { 2. Dravidian Group    { Canarese, Malayalas, Todas,
                                             { Khonds, Mundas, Santals,
                                             { Kohls, Bhillas.

It was Darwin’s theory that the distant progenitor of man was an
amphibious marine animal, and certainly from earliest times he has
had a predilection for water-ways and the sea-coast. The lines of these
have always directed his wanderings, and it is not surprising therefore
that nowhere do we find the physical types of the race so confusingly
amalgamated as in the insular littoral peoples. Not only is transit
easier in these localities, but on islands especially there is a more
rapid intermingling and a closer interbreeding than is apt to occur
in continental areas. This not only blends types, but it has another
effect. It is well known from observation on the lower animals that
such close unions result in the formation of more plastic organisms,
liable to present wide variations, and to develop into contrasting
characters.[146] This holds good also of mental products. For instance,
you might suppose that the dialects of the same island or the same
small archipelago would offer very slight differences. The reverse is
the case. In the same area the dialects of an island differ far more
than on the mainland. This is a fact well known to linguists, and is
parallel to the physical variations.[147] The ethnographer, therefore,
is prepared to attach less importance to corporeal and linguistic
differences in insular than in continental peoples.

_Physical Geography of Oceanica._--The island world of the Indian and
Pacific Oceans is divided geologically into two regions, Australasia
and Polynesia. The former, as its name denotes, is really a
southeasterly prolongation of the continent of Asia, and was united to
it in late tertiary times. The huge islands of Sumatra, Java and Borneo
are separated from the Malayan and Siamese peninsulas by channels
scarcely a couple of hundred feet deep; and from these a chain of
islands extends uninterruptedly to the semi-continent of Australia.
All these islands are of tertiary formation, and the subsidence which
separated them from the main took place at the close of that geologic
epoch.

The Polynesian islands, on the other hand, are of recent construction.
They are submarine towers of coral, erected on the crests of sunken
mountain ranges rising on the floor of a profoundly deep sea.
Nevertheless the flora and fauna of Polynesia resemble that of
Australasia in its strongly Asiatic character.

The islands of the Indian Ocean present some singular anomalies.
Ceylon, though so close to the Indian peninsula, is not a geological
fragment of it; while Madagascar, though four thousand miles away, was
unquestionably once a part of Southern Hindostan.[148] This, however,
was in remote eocene tertiary times, and long before man appeared.
The hypothesis, therefore, advanced by Hæckel and favored by Peschel
and other ethnographers, that the Indian Ocean was once filled by the
continent “Lemuria,” and that there man appeared on the globe, must be
dismissed so far as man is concerned, as in conflict with more accurate
observations.

Yet one must acknowledge that it has some plausibility from the present
ethnography of the islands and coasts of the Indian Ocean. There is
a general consensus of opinion that the earliest occupants of these
regions were an undersized black race, resembling in many respects the
negrillos of Austafrica. Upon these was superimposed an Asiatic stock
represented by the modern Malays; and the union of these two strains
gave rise to the anomalous tribes which occupy Southern Hindostan,
Australia, and some of the islands.

This historic scheme, which has a great deal in its favor, permits me
to classify the great island-world and its adjacent mainland into three
ethnographic categories as represented on the diagram.

Of these the most ancient is


I. THE NEGRITIC STOCK.

This embraces three subdivisions, (1) the Negritos, (2) the Papuas, (3)
the Melanesians.


_1. The Negrito Group._

The Negritos may be called the western branch of the stock. It is
noteworthy that they are located nearer to Africa, and that they more
distinctly resemble the Negrillo stock of that continent than do the
Papuas. To them belong the natives of the Andaman Islands known as
Mincopies, the Semangs, Mantras, and Sakaies of Malacca, the Aetas of
the Philippine Islands, and the Schobaengs of the Nicobar Isles.[149]
It is highly probable that they inhabited a large part of Southern
Hindostan, perhaps before it was united to the Himalayan highlands (see
p. 88), and some have been reported in Formosa.

They are believed to have been the original possessors of Borneo, Java,
Sumatra and the Celebes Islands, as well as parts of Indo-China; but
except in some mixed tribes, as the Mois of the latter region, their
stock has disappeared from those localities. It is noteworthy that not
a trace of their blood has been found in Asia north of the Hindu Cush
and Himalaya ranges.[150] Some writers have thought that they proceeded
along the eastern islands as far north as the Japanese archipelago, and
would explain some of the present physical traits of its inhabitants by
an ancient infusion of Negritic blood.

In physical aspect they are of small stature, not more than one-fourth
of the adult males reaching five feet in height; their color is
black, hair woolly, nearly beardless, and the body smooth. The nose is
flat, the face moderately prognathic, and the skull generally globular
(mesocephalic index 80°-81°), but on the Philippines and in Indo-China
rather dolichocephalic. Their forms are symmetrical, though they are
thin-legged, without calves; their movements agile and graceful.[151]

They are averse to culture, and depend on hunting and fishing. As
weapons, they know the bow and arrow, the lance, and the sarbacane or
blow-pipe, but have not acquired the art of chipping stone. When they
use that material, they split it by exposure to fire. They are timid
and distrustful of strangers, and they well may be, as they have been
pursued remorselessly by slave-catching pirates, and were constantly
exposed to the brutal aggressions of their stronger neighbors.

The portrait presented of their tribal customs is rather pleasing. The
social organization is based on the family, the heads of which elect
the tribal chieftain, and their respect for the dead amounts to a
religion. Beyond the ancestral worship they have few rites, though some
ceremonies are performed to appease the evil spirits, and others at the
time of full moon and thunderstorms, and at births and deaths. Among
their myths is one relating to a mythical great serpent, who seems to
be a beneficent deity, pointing out to them where game abounds, and
where the bees have deposited wild honey. They are monogamous, and
neither steal nor buy their wives, the lover arranging the matter with
his chosen one, and then sending a present to her father. They have
learned the luxury of tobacco, and prize it highly, but for alcoholic
beverages they have no longing. As they are migratory, their house
building is limited to shelters of light materials, and for clothing a
breech-cloth is sufficient.[152]

In so many respects, geographical as well as physical, do these
dwarfish blacks stand between the Negro peoples of Austafrica and
Australasia that we are not surprised at the conclusion suggested by
Prof. W. H. Flower, that they may be “the primitive type from which the
African Negroes on the one hand, and the Melanesians on the other, may
have sprung.”[153]


_2. The Papuan Group_

Is found in its purity on the great island of New Guinea and the
chains east and west of it, but even there it discloses considerable
diversity. In color the Papuas vary from a coal black to a dark brown,
their hair is woolly, and there is considerable on the body and face,
stature medium, legs thin. Their lips are thick, and the nostrils
broad, but the nose is high and curved. Yet the best observers agree
that they vary extremely in physiognomy, and that in New Guinea,
tribes of equally pure blood have the skull sometimes broad, sometimes
long. These variations we may attribute to the influence of insular
conditions, or to some intermixture of blood.[154]

The Papuas belong to the lowest stages of culture. Some of their tribes
do not know the bow and arrow, and few of them have any pottery.
Their languages are agglutinating, but have this peculiarity, that
the modifications of the root are generally by prefixes instead of
suffixes, in this respect reminding one of the African rather than the
Sibiric families of tongues.

Their territory includes parts of the New Hebrides, the Loyalty Isles,
New Caledonia, Viti, and a variety of smaller groups. These islanders
are usually of mixed type, and are known as “Melanesians.” The natives
of the Feejee Islands are an excellent specimen of these, and their
archipelago forms the dividing line between the Papuan and Polynesian
groups.[155]


_3. The Melanesian Group._

The Melanesians, of all the islanders, present in individual cases the
strongest likeness to the equatorial African Negro; yet among these
there is that prevailing variability of type so frequent in insular
peoples. Their color passes from the black of the typical Negro to the
yellow of the Malayan; their hair, generally frizzly, may be quite
straight and of any hue from black to blonde. These variations are in
individuals or families, and are not owing to mixed blood.[156]

Unlike the Polynesians, the Melanesians are agricultural in habits, and
sedentary. They build artistically decorated houses, are acquainted
with the bow and arrow, occasionally make pottery, and construct
shapely canoes, though not given to long voyages. The women are modest
and chaste, and their religion is principally a form of ancestral
worship.

The languages of these islanders betray their compound origin. In form
and in the pronominal elements they stand related to the Malayan and
Polynesian idioms, and in structure approach sometimes the richness of
the former. In the Viti, for example, both prefixes and suffixes are
employed, and the possessive is added to the noun. The root words are
monosyllables or dissyllables, and drawn from the Papuan idioms, and
the phonetics are much richer than the Polynesian.

These facts go to show that the Melanesians are physically and
linguistically a mixed people, a compound of the woolly-haired black
Papuas, whom we may suppose to have been the aborigines of Melanesia,
with the smooth-haired, light-colored Malays, who reached the
archipelago as adventurers and immigrants. As their tongues form, as it
were, the second stratum of structure when compared with the Polynesian
dialects, we can go a step further and say that the ethnic formation of
the Melanesian islanders occurred subsequently to the construction of
the Polynesian physical type and languages.[157]

The ethnic relationship of the various adjoining islanders to the
Papuas has been studied by many observers, but its solution has not
yet been reached. The Papuas themselves impressed Hale as partly
Malayan--“a hybrid race,”[158] and Virchow calls attention to the fact
that a broad zone of wavy-haired peoples intervene between the Papuas
and the pure Malays, shading off into the Australians on the one hand
and the Veddahs of Ceylon on the other.[159] This is very significant
of the ethnic origin of the inhabitants of Australasia.

It is borne out by an examination of the Papuan languages. These are
quite dissimilar among themselves, and appear to have been derived from
a number of independent linguistic stocks. While these were originally
distinct from the Malayan, it is a recognized fact that all the Papuan,
and still more all the Melanesian dialects, have absorbed extensively
from Malayan and Polynesian sources, and we are certain, therefore,
that a similar absorption of Malayan blood has taken place.[160]


II. THE MALAYIC STOCK

Is by far the most important group of peoples with whom we have to do
in the area we are now studying. Many ethnologists, indeed, set it up
as a distinct race, the “Malayan” or “Brown” race, and claim for it an
importance not less than any of the darker varieties of the species. It
bears, however, the marks of an origin too recent, and presents Asian
analogies too clearly, for it to be regarded otherwise than as a branch
of the Asian race, descended like it from some ancestral tribe in that
great continent. Its dispersion has been extraordinary. Its members
are found almost continuously on the land areas from Madagascar to
Easter Island, a distance nearly two-thirds of the circumference of the
globe; everywhere they speak dialects with such affinities that we must
assume for all one parent stem, and their separation must have taken
place not so very long ago to have permitted such a monoglottic trait
as this.

The stock is divided at present into two groups, the western or Malayan
peoples, and the eastern or Polynesian peoples. There has been some
discussion about the original identity of these, but we may consider it
now proved by both physical, linguistic and traditional evidence.[161]
The original home of the parent stem has also excited some controversy,
but this too may be taken as settled. There is no reasonable doubt but
that the Malays came from the southeastern regions of Asia, from the
peninsula of Farther India, and thence spread south, east and west over
the whole of the island world. Their first occupation of Sumatra and
Java has been estimated to have occurred not later than 1000 B. C.,
and probably was a thousand years earlier, or about the time that the
Aryans entered Northern India.

The relationship of the Malayic with the other Asian stocks has not yet
been made out. Physically they stand near to the Sinitic peoples of
small stature and roundish heads of southeastern Asia.[162] The oldest
form of their language, however, was not monosyllabic and tonic, but
was dissyllabic. Structurally, it was largely of the “isolating” type,
the relations of the members of the proposition being expressed by
loose words, as is still the case in some of the Polynesian dialects.
This is scarcely recognizable in the developed Malayan and Tagala
idioms where there is a richly varied structure by suffixes, prefixes
and infixes; but the building up of these grammatical resources can be
traced back from the simple original tongue, or _Ursprache_, I have
mentioned.[163] We cannot be far wrong, therefore, in associating
in some remote past the ancestral Malays, with their isolating,
dissyllabic speech, yellowish-brown complexion, short skulls and small
stature, with the Indo-Chinese group of the Sinitic branch of the Asian
race.


_1. The Western or Malayan Group._

The purest type of the true Malays is seen in Malacca, Sumatra and
Java. They are of medium or slightly under size, the complexion from
olive to brown. The hair is black, straight and lank, and the beard is
scanty. The eyes are black, often slightly oblique, the nose straight
and rather prominent, the mouth large, and the chin well developed. The
skull is short (brachycephalic), and the muscular force less than the
European average.

This type is found among the Malayans of Malacca and Sumatra, the
Javanese, the Madurese and Tagalas. It has changed slightly by foreign
intermixture among the Battaks of Sumatra, the Dayaks of Borneo, the
Alfures and the Bugis. But the supposition that these are so remote
that they cannot properly be classed with the Malays is an exaggeration
of some recent ethnographers, and is not approved by the best
authorities.[164] The chief differences are that the Battak type is
larger and stronger than the average Malay, the skull is more oval, the
hair finer in texture and lighter in color.

In character the Malays are energetic, quick of perception, genial
in demeanor, but unscrupulous, cruel and revengeful. Veracity is
unknown, and the love of gain is far stronger than any other passion
or affection. This thirst for gold made the Malay the daring navigator
he early became. As merchant, pirate or explorer, and generally as all
three in one, he pushed his crafts far and wide over the tropical seas
through twelve thousand miles of extent.

On the extreme west he reached and colonized Madagascar. The Hovas
there, undoubtedly of Malay blood, number about 800,000 in a population
of five and a half millions, the remainder being Negroids of various
degrees of fusion. In spite of this disproportion, the Hovas are the
recognized masters of the island. Their language stands in closest
relation to that of the Battaks of Sumatra. In physical appearance they
have a striking likeness to the Polynesians, so close, indeed, that the
one may readily be mistaken for the other.[165]

On the great islands near the Malaccan peninsula there are tribes
in different stages of culture. Those on the highest plane are the
Javanese, whose ancient language, the Kavi, is preserved in their
sacred books. The Battaks of Northern Sumatra are an agricultural
people, who have not accepted Islam, and belong to the old stock of the
Asian immigrants. They are still to some extent cannibals, a convict
condemned to death being eaten by the community. The Dayaks of Borneo
are not less truculent, being cannibals and famous “head hunters”--that
is, their highest trophy of war and proof of manhood is to bring home
the head of a slain enemy. Some of them are agriculturists, others
sea robbers. Their dwellings are of the communal character, and their
religion an idolatry, the figures of the gods being carved in wood.

The Macassars of the Celebes and the Tagalas of the Philippines are
Malays of milder habits, and possess commercial importance and literary
culture. In these islanders there is a mixed class called Alfures, who
have attracted some attention as differing from the prevalent type, but
they are of no ethnographic importance.

The Malays probably established various colonies in Southern India.
The natives at Travancore and the Sinhalese of Ceylon bear a strongly
Malayan aspect. But the latter speak a dialect largely Aryac, and the
Veddahs in the interior of the island have a much lower cephalic index
than the Malay (about 72), and their language is derived about one-half
from Aryac and the rest from Dravidian (Tamil) sources.[166]


_2. The Eastern or Polynesian Group._

Some ethnographers would make the Polynesians and Micronesians a
different race from the Malays; but the farthest that one can go in
this direction is to admit that they reveal some strain of another
blood. This is evident in their physical appearance. They are
uncommonly tall, symmetrical and handsome, a stature over six feet not
being unusual among them. Their features are regular, their color a
light brown. Their hair is black, smooth and glossy, sometimes with a
curl or crisp in it, which betrays a touch of Papuan blood. All the
Polynesian languages have some affinities to the Malayan, and the
Polynesian traditions unanimously refer to the west for the home of
their ancestors. We are able, indeed, by carefully analyzing these
traditions, to trace with considerable accuracy both the route they
followed to the Oceanic isles and the respective dates when they
settled them.

Thus, the first station of their ancestors on leaving the western
group, was the small island of Buru or Boru, between Celebes and New
Guinea. Here they encountered the Papuas, some of whom still dwell in
the interior, while the coast people are fair.[167] Leaving Boru, they
passed to the north of New Guinea, colonizing the Caroline and Solomon
Islands, but the vanguard pressing forward to take possession of Savai
in the Samoan group and Tonga to its south. These two islands formed
a second centre of distribution over the western Pacific. The Maoris
of New Zealand moved from Tonga--“holy Tonga” as they call it in their
songs--about six hundred years ago. The Society islanders migrated from
Savai, and they in turn sent forth the population of the Marquesas, the
Sandwich Islands and Easter Island.

The separation of the Polynesians from the western Malays must have
taken place about the beginning of our era. This length of time permits
the best adjustment of their several traditions, and is not so long as
to render it difficult to explain the similarity of their dialects and
usages.[168]

The disposition of the Polynesian is an improvement on that of the
Malay. He is more to be trusted, and is more affable. In culture he
is backward. Pottery is scarcely known, agriculture is not carried
on, cannibalism was nigh universal, polygamy was prevalent, and the
relation of the sexes was exceedingly loose, especially among the
unmarried. The islanders, as may be expected, are singularly skilful
navigators and build excellent canoes. They do not hesitate to
undertake voyages of five or six hundred miles, and are such excellent
swimmers that if the boat capsizes they are in no danger of drowning.
Their weapons were the lance, the sling and club, but they were not
acquainted with the bow and arrow.

Their religion, until the introduction of Christianity, was a frank
polytheism. The deeds of the gods are related in long chants, which
also contain many historic references.[169] The word “taboo” comes from
Polynesia, and means “sacred,” “holy.” All objects which the priests
declared “taboo” were considered to be consecrated to the supernatural
powers, and to touch them was to incur sure death. They were accustomed
to set apart enclosures which were “taboo,” and served as temples, and
the images of the gods, in wood or stone, rudely carved, were there
erected.

Although their houses were generally of brush and leaves, on several of
the islands they constructed stone edifices. Such are found upon the
Caroline islands, on sacred Tonga, on Pitcairn, and on Easter island,
the last mentioned have excited particular attention, and have given
rise to various foolish theories about a previous race of high culture,
and about relationship to the civilized American nations of Peru and
Central America. It is enough to say that nothing on Easter island is
peculiar to its culture. There are stone platforms with rude stone
images on them thirty or forty feet high; there are the foundations of
stone houses; there are remains of a primitive ideographic writing. All
these occur also on the other islands I have named, and the natives of
Rapa-nui, as the island is called by the Tahitians, have nothing in
their language or arts to distinguish them from other Polynesians. The
pre-historic colossal structures on Ponape, Lalla and others of the
Caroline group, are of basalt, and testify to a creditable ambition and
skill on the part of the builders; but careful investigations prove
that they are “without any doubt” to be attributed to the ancestors of
the present inhabitants.[170]


III. THE AUSTRALIC STOCK.

Under the heading of the Australic branch, I would class together
the primitive inhabitants of the peninsula of Hindostan and of the
semi-continent of Australia.

The collocation may seem hazardous, but it has its reasons. The
physical traits of the two are not remote. In both the hair is black
and curly, showing Negritic blood, the skull is medium or long, the
lips are full, the nose not prominent, the color brown, and there is a
beard. The relationship of the Australians to some of the hill tribes
of central India has been referred to as possible by the naturalist
Wallace, and the linguist Caldwell finds Australian analogies in the
Dravidian tongues, and points out that both are of the agglutinative
type, and with family resemblances.[171] The suggestion seems close
at hand that the Australian is a compound of the Negritic stock of
Australasia with the Malay, the Dravidian perhaps with the Malay, and
also with some other Asian people.[172] The English ethnologist, C.
Staniland Wake, has advanced an almost equivalent theory to the effect
that a straight-haired stock combined with the Australasian Negrito to
form the Australians, but this straight-haired people he would attach
to the “Caucasian” (Eurafrican) race, for which there is little or no
evidence.[173]


_1. The Australian Group_

Occupies the whole semi-continent of Australia and the island of
Tasmania south of it. The last of the Tasmanians perished some years
ago, and Carl Lumholtz, one of the most recent of Australian explorers,
calculates the survivors of the native inhabitants of that continent at
not over 30,000 individuals of pure blood.

Their appearance differs considerably, although it is generally
conceded that they speak related idioms, and originally came from one
lineage and language. The Tasmanians had quite frizzly or woolly hair,
and according to reliable observers correspond closely in habits and
appearance to the Papuas.[174] Among the Australians of the north and
northeast coast this resemblance is still accentuated, and no wonder,
when the islands in Torres straits, one in sight of the other, form
natural stepping stones from New Guinea to Australia. On the west coast
the hair is straighter, and the signs of Malay blood are obvious. The
color varies from dark to light brown, and the beard is generally full,
the body being also well supplied with hair.[175]

The culture status of the Australians is generally put at the very
lowest. Their roving tribes are without government, they do not till
the ground, they go naked, and do not know the bow and arrow. Their
weapons are the spear and the boomerang, a crooked club which they
throw at the object. The story that it returns to the thrower is only
true of some used in sport (Lumholtz). Marriage among them is by
robbery or purchase, and the women are treated with deliberate cruelly.
Cannibalism in its most revolting form is usual, and the sick are
deserted. Their religion is a low fetichism, and they have no idols nor
forms of worship. Certain rites, as fasting, sacrificing, and solemn
dancing, clearly have reference to the supposed supernatural powers.
In some parts, however, they draw figures of animals with charcoal on
the sides of caves, and manufacture rude stone carvings.[176] They chip
flakes into spear-points, and are skilful in making fire from friction,
in catching animals and other simple arts. Their songs are numerous,
and are chanted in correct time.

The _corroborees_, or dances, constitute their principal religious and
social festivals. These are usually celebrated at night, by the light
of great fires, and accompanied by a horrible clangor, which passes
for music, produced from drums, flutes, and a sort of tambourine. The
chants relate to adventures in war and love, in boasting recitals,
and in descriptions of ancestral power. The initiation of the young of
both sexes into the duties of adult life is always accompanied with
some solemnities, such as fasting, incising the flesh in lines so as to
leave prominent scars, cutting the hair, breaking one or more teeth,
and with local mutilations of a painful and shocking character.

As usual among the primitive peoples, sickness and death are regarded,
not as natural events, but as the maleficent action of evil spirits
or living enemies. When ill, therefore, the services of the priest
or magician is called in to counteract the sorcery and to name the
adversary who sets it on foot. These adepts employ the same Shamanistic
practices, rubbing, blowing, sucking, howling, which are popular with
them everywhere, and if these fail, at least at death they can suggest
who the hidden enemy has been, and thus furnish a pretext for the
avenger of blood to start forth on his murderous mission.

In some parts the dead are burned; in others, the flesh is scraped from
the bones, or the body is exposed until they are cleaned by the ants
and other animals, and then they are carefully collected and placed in
an ossuary; or again, the body is buried in the hut where the death
took place, this is torn down and thrown on the grave, and the place is
deserted. The spirits of the dead are supposed to haunt the place where
the body is left, and as a rule to exercise an evil influence on the
living. Food is occasionally placed on the grave, and some ceremonies
of mourning are repeated for eleven months; usually, the survivors
refrain from repeating the name of the deceased, even if it is a word
of common use.[177]

Rudimentary as was their culture, it is interesting to notice that they
had developed the conception of writing. They were accustomed to send
information, and even describe events, by incising peculiarly formed
notches, lines and figures on pieces of wood, called “message sticks.”
These would be sent by runners for hundreds of miles, and could be read
by the recipient through the conventional meanings assigned to the
characters.[178]


_2. The Dravidian Group._

I have already given you a description of the general appearance of the
Dravidas or Dravidians. There is some physical resemblance among them
all, but here the similarity ceases, as they vary greatly in culture
and language. They are held to have been the pre-Aryac population of
India, and one of their tribes, the Brahui, is found north of the
mountains, in Beloochistan. When the Aryans entered India, about two
thousand years before our era, they either subjugated, destroyed or
drove to the south these earlier possessors of the soil. They either
became the lowest caste in the Aryac states, the “sudras,” or they
fled to the swamps and hills. Their total number at present is about
50,000,000.

Linguistically they are divisible into two distinct groups, the
Dravidas proper, and the Mundas. To the former belong the Tamuls, the
Telugus, the Canarese, the Malayalas, the Todas, the Khonds, and other
tribes of less importance. The skin of all these is brown, the hair
curly, the head tending to dolichocephaly. The Todas of the Neilghery
hills are regarded as of unusually pure blood. They are tall, with full
beards and prominent noses, the hair black and bushy. Undoubtedly many
of the Dravidas partake of Aryac blood through the long domination of
that stock.

Most of the Dravida nations are cultured, possessing a written language
and a literature. They are pastoral and agricultural in habits, and
usually the women are well treated, and enjoy a certain degree of
freedom. Monogamy is the prevalent custom, but polyandry (see p. 53)
is frequent, and infanticide, particularly of female children, is
looked upon with approval. Their religion is a nature-worship of a low
order, consisting principally of conjurations against evil spirits and
divination by sorcerers.

The Munda tribes include the Kohls, the Santals, the Bhillas and
others, dwelling on the highlands of the interior, northwest of
Calcutta. They are hunting and agricultural peoples, having a better
reputation among the Europeans than their Hindoo neighbors. The
physical type among them is variable, natives of the same village
differing in color and hair, indicating frequent crossings with the
Aryac and other foreign stock.

[Illustration: ETHNIC CHART OF HINDOSTAN.]

The languages of the Dravidians, though of the type called
agglutinative, have no demonstrative connection with those of the
Sibiric (Altaic) stock, and the efforts to connect them historically
are visionary. The original roots are monosyllabic, which are modified
by the addition of suffixes. These suffixes often show the same
“vocalic harmony” to which I have referred in some of the Sibiric
idioms (above, p. 212); but its action is reversed, as while in
Turkish, for example, the vowel of the suffix alters the vowel of the
root, in Telugu it is the latter which controls the former.

Although all the Dravida tongues have borrowed more or less from the
Sanscrit, it has been in words only, and their peculiar structure
stands as ever wholly apart from all Aryac speech. There is something
that looks like inflection in them, but the case-endings are merely
particles referring to place, and not true grammatical cases. They are
still in that stage of growth where the distinction of verb and noun is
ill-defined, and relative pronouns are absent.

The literature which has been developed in these tongues is of
respectable extent. That of the Tamils of southern Hindostan and
northern Ceylon stands in the front rank. It is in both prose and
poetry, special forms of expression being characteristic of the latter.
Everywhere it reveals Aryac inspiration, and illustrates the general
traits of the Dravidian intellect, ready facility in imitating and
adapting the forms of a higher civilization, but limited originality
and independence of thought.



LECTURE IX.

THE AMERICAN RACE.

CONTENTS.--Peopling of America. Divisions.

    1. The Arctic Group. Members. Location. Character. 2. The North
    Atlantic Group. Tinneh, Algonkins, Iroquois, Dakotas, Muskokis,
    Caddoes, Shoshonees, etc. 3. The North Pacific Group. Tlinkits,
    Haidahs, Californians, Pueblos. 4. The Mexican Group. The Aztecs
    or Nahuas. Other nations. 5. The Inter-Isthmian Group. The Mayas.
    Their culture. Other tribes. 6. The South Atlantic Group. The
    Caribs, the Arawaks, the Tupis. Other tribes. 7. The South Pacific
    Group. The Qquichuas or Peruvians. Their culture. Other tribes.


The American Race includes those tribes whom we familiarly call
“Indians,” a designation, as you know, which perpetuates the error of
Columbus, who thought the western land he discovered was a part of
India.

I shall not undertake to discuss those extensive questions, Who are
the Indians? and, When was America peopled? and, By what route did the
first inhabitants come here? These knotty points I treat in another
course of lectures, where I marshal sufficient arguments, I think, to
show satisfactorily that America was peopled during, if not before,
the Great Ice Age; that its first settlers probably came from Europe
by way of a land connection which once existed over the northern
Atlantic, and that their long and isolated residence in this continent
has moulded them all into a singularly homogeneous race, which varies
but slightly anywhere on the continent, and has maintained its type
unimpaired for countless generations. Never at any time before Columbus
was it influenced in blood, language or culture by any other race.

So marked is the unity of its type, so alike the physical and mental
traits of its members from Arctic to Antarctic latitudes, that I cannot
divide it any other way than geographically, as follows:

  1. Arctic Group.
  2. North Atlantic Group.
  3. North Pacific Group.
  4. Mexican Group.
  5. Inter-Isthmian Group.
  6. South Atlantic Group.
  7. South Pacific Group.

All the higher civilizations are contained in the Pacific group, the
Mexican really belonging to it by derivation and original location.
Between the members of the Pacific and Atlantic groups there was very
little communication at any period, the high Sierras walling them
apart; but among the members of each Pacific and each Atlantic group,
the intercourse was constant and extensive. The Nahuas, for instance,
spread down the Pacific from Sonora to the straits of Panama; the Inca
power stretched along the coast for two thousand miles; but neither of
these reached into the Atlantic plains. So with the Atlantic groups;
the Guarani tongue can be traced from Buenos Ayres to the Amazon, the
Algonkin from the Savannah River to Hudson Bay; but neither crossed the
mountains to the west. The groups therefore are cultural as well as
geographical, and represent natural divisions of tribes as well as of
regions.

The northernmost of this division is


_1. The Arctic Group._

This group comprises the Eskimo and Aleutian tribes.

The more correct name for the former is that which they give
themselves, _Innuit_, “men.” They are essentially a maritime people,
extending along the northern coasts of the continent from Icy Bay in
Alaska on the west, almost to the Straits of Belle Isle on the Labrador
side. Northward they reach into Greenland, where the Scandinavians
found them about the year 1000 A. D., although it is likely that these
Greenland Eskimos had come from Labrador no long time before.[179]

Throughout the whole of this extensive distribution, they present a
most remarkable uniformity of appearance, languages, arts and customs.
The unity of their tribes is everywhere manifest.

The physical appearance of the Eskimos is characteristic. Their color
is dark, hair black and coarse, stature medium, skull generally long
(dolichocephalic, 71-73). The beard is scant and the cheek bones high.

They usually have a cheerful, lively disposition, and are much given
to stories, songs and laughter. Neither the long nights of the polar
zone, nor the cruel cold of the winters, dampens their glee. Before
their deterioration by contact with the whites, they were truthful and
honest. Their intelligence in many directions is remarkable, and they
invented and improved many mechanical devices in advance of any other
tribes of the race. Thus, they alone on the American continent used
lamps. They make them of stone, with a wick of dried moss. The sledge
with its team of dogs is one of their devices; and gloves, boots and
divided clothing are articles of dress not found on the continent south
of them. Their “kayak,” a light and strong boat of sealskins stretched
over a frame of bones or wood, is the perfection of a sea-canoe. Their
carvings in bone, wood or ivory, and their outline drawings, reveal no
small degree of technical skill; and they independently discovered the
principle of the arch and apply it to the construction of their domed
snow-houses. The principal weapons among them are the bow and arrow and
the lance.

The Aleutians proper live on the central and eastern islands of the
Archipelago named from them. Their language differs wholly from the
Eskimo. At present they are largely civilized.


_2. The North Atlantic Group._

The spacious water-shed of the Atlantic stretches from the crests of
the Rocky Mountains to the Eastern Ocean. Whether the streams debouch
into Hudson Bay or the Gulf of Mexico, their waters find their way to
the Atlantic. The most of this region was in the possession of a few
linguistic stocks, whose members, generally at war with each other,
roved widely over these lowlands.

The northernmost of them was the _Athapasca_ stock. Its members called
themselves Tinnéh, “people,” and they are also known as Chepewyans, an
Algonkin word meaning “pointed skins,” applied from the shape of the
skin robe they wore, pointed in front and behind.[180]

Their country extended from Hudson Bay to the Cascade Range of the
Rocky Mountains, and from the Arctic Ocean southward to a line drawn
from the mouth of the Churchill river to the mouth of the Frazer river.
The northern tribes extend westward nearly to the delta of the Yukon
river, and reach the seacoast at the mouth of the Copper river. At some
remote period, some of its bands forsook their inhospitable abodes in
the north, and following the eastern flanks of the Cordillera, migrated
far south into Mexico, where they form the Apaches and Navajos, and the
Lipans near the mouth of the Rio del Norte.

The general trend of the pre-historic migrations of the Tinnéh, seems
to have been from a centre west of Hudson Bay, whence they diverged
north, west, and southwest.

In physical features they are of average stature and superior muscular
development. The color varies considerably, even in the same village,
but tends toward a brown. The skull is long, the face broad, and the
cheek-bones prominent.[181]

In point of culture the Tinnéh stand low. The early missionaries
who undertook the difficult task of bringing them into accord with
Christian morals have left painful portraitures of the brutality
of the lives of their flocks. The Apaches have for centuries been
notorious for their savage dispositions and untamable ferocity. They
are, however, skilful hunters, bold warriors, and of singular physical
endurance.

Immediately south of the Athabascans, throughout their whole extent,
were the _Algonkins_. They extended uninterruptedly from Cape Race, in
Newfoundland, to the Rocky Mountains, on both banks of the St. Lawrence
and the Great Lakes. The Blackfeet were their westernmost tribe, and
in Canada they embraced the Crees, Montagnais, Micmacs, Ottawas, etc.
In the area of the United States they were known in New England as the
Abnakis, Passamaquoddies, Pequots, etc.; on the Hudson, as Mohegans;
on the Delaware, as Lenape; in Maryland, as Nanticokes; in Virginia,
as Powhatans; while in the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, the Miamis,
Sacs and Foxes, Kickapoos and Chippeways, were of this stock. Its most
southern representatives were the Shawnees, who once lived on the
Tennessee, and, perhaps, the Savannah river, and were closely related
to the Mohegans of New York.

Most of these tribes were agricultural, raising maize, beans, squash
and tobacco; they occupied fixed residences in towns most of the
year; they were skilled in chipping and polishing stone, and they
had a definite, even rigid, social organization. Their mythology was
extensive, and its legends, as well as the history of their ancestors,
were retained in memory by a system of ideographic writing, of
which a number of specimens have been preserved. Their intellectual
capacities were strong, and the distinguished characters that arose
among them--King Philip, Tecumseh, Black Hawk, Pontiac, Tammany,
Powhatan--displayed, in their dealings of war or peace with the
Europeans, an ability, a bravery and a sense of right, on a par with
the famed heroes of antiquity.

The earliest traceable seat of this widely extended group was somewhere
between the St. Lawrence River and Hudson Bay. To this region their
traditions point, and there the language is found in its purest and
most archaic form. They apparently divided early into two branches, the
one following the Atlantic coast southward, the other the St. Lawrence
and the Great Lakes westward. Of those that remained, some occupied
Newfoundland, others spread over Labrador, where they were thrown into
frequent contact with the Eskimos.

Surrounded on all sides by the Algonkins, the _Iroquois_ first appear
in history as occupying a portion of the area of New York State. To the
west, in the adjoining part of Canada, were their kinsmen, the Eries
and Hurons; on the Susquehanna, in Pennsylvania, the Conestogas; and
in Virginia, the Tuscaroras. All were closely related, but in constant
feud. Those in New York were united as the Five Nations, and as such,
are prominent figures in the early annals of the English colony. The
date of the formation of their celebrated league is reasonably placed
in the fifteenth century.

Another extensively dispersed stock is that of the _Dakotas_. Their
area reached from Lake Michigan to the Rocky Mountains, and from the
Saskatchewan to the Arkansas rivers, covering most of the valley of
the Missouri. A fragment of them, the Tuteloes, resided in Virginia,
where they were associated with the Monacans, now extinct, but who were
probably of the same stock.

They are also called the Sioux. Their principal tribes are the
Assiniboins, to the north; the Hidatsa or Crows, at the west; the
Winnebagoes to the east; the Omahas, Mandans, Otoes, and Poncas, on the
Missouri; the Osages and Kansas to the south.

The _Chahta-Muskoki_ stock occupied the area of what we call the Gulf
States, from the Atlantic to the Mississippi River. They comprised the
Creeks or Muskokis, the Choctaws, Chickasaws, and later the Seminoles.
The latter took possession of Florida early in the last century.
Previously that peninsula had been inhabited by the Timucuas, a nation
now wholly extinct, though its language is still preserved in the works
of the Spanish missionaries.

The Creeks and their neighbors were first visited by Fernando de Soto
in 1540, on that famous expedition when he discovered the Mississippi.
The narratives of his campaign represent them as cultivating extensive
fields of corn, living in well fortified towns, their houses erected
on artificial mounds, and the villages having defences of embankments
of earth. These statements are verified by the existing remains, which
compare favorably in size and construction with those left by the
mysterious “Mound Builders” of the Ohio valley. In fact, the opinion
is steadily gaining ground that probably the builders of the Ohio
earthworks were the ancestors of the Creeks, Cherokees, and other
southern tribes.[182]

Much of the area of eastern Texas, and the land north of it to the
Platte River, were held by various tribes of the _Caddoes_. Fragments
of them are found nearly as far north as the Canada line, and it is
probable that their migration was from this higher latitude southerly,
though their own legends referred to the east as their first home. They
depended for subsistence chiefly on hunting and fishing, thus remaining
in a lower stage of progress than their neighbors in the Mississippi
valley.

Sometimes this is called the _Pani_ family, from one of their members,
the Pawnees, on the Platte River. Their most northerly tribe was the
Arickarees, who reached to the middle Missouri, and in the south the
Witchitas were the most prominent.

The _Kioways_ now live about the head-waters of the Nebraska or Platte
River, along the northern line of Colorado. Formerly they roamed over
the plains of Texas, but according to an ancient tradition, they came
from some high northern latitude, and made use of sleds.[183]

Omitting a number of small tribes, whose names would weary you, I
shall mention in the Atlantic group the _Shoshonee_ bands, called
also Snake or Ute Indians. They extended from the coast of Texas in
a northwesterly direction over New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona and
Nevada, to the borders of California, and reached the Pacific near
Santa Barbara. Many of them are a low grade of humanity, the lowest
in skull-form, says Professor Virchow, of any he has examined on the
continent. The “Root-diggers” are one of their tribes, living in the
greatest squalor. Yet it would be a serious error to suppose they
are not capable of better things. Many among them have shown decided
intellectual powers. Sarah Winnemucca, a full blood Pi-Ute, was an
acceptable and fluent lecturer in the English language,[184] and
their war chiefs have at times given our army officers no little
trouble by their skill and energy.

[Illustration: INDIAN TRIBES OF THE UNITED STATES.]

The Comanches are the best known of the Shoshonees, and present the
finest types of the stock. They are of average stature, straight noses,
features regular, and even handsome, and the expression manly. They
are splendid horsemen and skilful hunters, but men never given to an
agricultural life.


_3. The North Pacific Group._

The narrow valleys of the Pacific slope are traversed by streams rich
in fish, whose wooded banks abounded in game. Shut off from one another
by lofty ridges, they became the home of isolated tribes, who developed
in course of time peculiarities of speech, culture and appearance.
Hence it is that there is an extraordinary diversity of stocks along
that coast, and few of them have any wide extent.

In the extreme north the _Tlinkit_ or _Kolosch_ are in proximity to
the Eskimos near Mount St. Elias. They are an ingenious and sedentary
people, living in villages of square wooden houses, many parts of
which are elaborately carved into fantastic figures. Their canoes are
dug out of tree trunks, and are both graceful in shape and remarkably
seaworthy. With equal deftness they manufacture clothing from skin,
ornaments from bone, ivory, wood and stone, utensils from horn and
stone, and baskets and mats from rushes.[185]

To the south of them are the Haidahs of Vancouver’s island, distantly
related in language to the Tlinkit, and closely in the arts of life.
Their elaborately carved pipes in black slate, and their intricate
designs in wood, testify to their dexterity as artists. South of them
are various stocks, the Tsimshian on the Nass and Skeena rivers, the
Nootka on the sound of that name, the Salish, who occupy a large tract,
and others.[186]

All the above are north of the line of the United States. Not far south
of it are the Sahaptins, or Nez Percés, who are noteworthy for two
traits, one their language, which is to some extent inflectional, with
cases like the Latin, and the second, for their commercial abilities.
They owned the divide between the headwaters of the Missouri and of
the Columbia rivers, and from remote times carried the products of the
Pacific slope--shells, beads, pipes, etc.--far down the Missouri, to
barter them for articles from the Mississippi valley.

The coast of California was thickly peopled by many tribes of no
linguistic affinities, most of whom have now disappeared. They offer
little of interest except to the specialist, and I shall omit their
enumeration in order to devote more time to the Pueblo Indians and
Cliff-dwellers of New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona.

These include divers tribes, Moquis, Zuñis, Acomas and others, not
related in language, but upon the same plane of culture, and that one
in many respects higher than any tribe I have yet named to you. They
constructed large buildings (pueblos) of stone and sun-dried brick,
with doors and windows supported by beams of wood; they were not only
tillers of the soil, but devised extensive systems of irrigation, by
which the water was conducted for miles to the fields; they were both
skilful and tasteful in the manufacture of pottery and clothing; and
as places of defence or retreat they erected stone towers and lodged
well-squared stone dwellings on the ledges of the deep cañons, known as
“cliff houses.”


_4. The Mexican Group._

The nations of leading prominence in this group spoke the Aztec or
Nahuatl tongue. On the arrival of Cortes, they controlled the territory
from the Gulf to the Pacific, and their colonies and commerce extended
far north and south. They dwelt in populous cities built of brick and
stone, were diligent cultivators of the soil, made use of a phonetic
system of writing, and had an ample literature preserved in books.

The physical traits of the Aztecs were nowise peculiar. Their skulls
were moderately long or medium, though a few are brachycephalic, the
forehead narrow, the face broad. The hair is occasionally wavy, and
they present more beard than most of the other Indians. The color is
from light to dark brown, the nose prominent, and the ears large. In
stature they are medium or less, strongly built and muscular. Persons
ill-made or deformed are rare, and among the young of both sexes
graceful and symmetrical forms are not uncommon.

The governments of the various nations were based on the system of
clans, gentes or totems, which was common not only in America, but in
most primitive communities. Each gens had a right of representation,
and the land belonged to its members, not as individuals, but as parts
of the clan. The highest officer of the State was in early times
elected by the chiefs of the gentes, but later the office became
hereditary.

Of all the arts, that of architecture was most developed. The pyramid
of Cholula compares in magnitude with the most stupendous results of
human labor. It has four terraces, and its base is a square, 1500 feet
on each side. Similar structures are found at Papantla, Teotihuacan,
and other localities. They are built of earth, stone, and baked brick,
and could only have been completed by the united and directed labor
of large bodies of workmen. The cities of ancient Mexico were many in
number, and contained thousands of houses. Tenochtitlan was surrounded
by walls of stone, and its population must have been at least sixty
thousand souls.

Of their cultivated plants the most important were maize, cotton,
beans, cacao and tobacco. An intoxicating beverage, called _octli_, was
prepared from the fermented juice of the agave, but its use was limited
by stringent regulations, and repeated drunkenness was punished with
death.

The Aztecs were in the “bronze age” of industrial development. Various
tools, as hoes, chisels and scrapers, ornaments, as beads and bells,
formed of an alloy of tin and copper, and copper plates of a crescentic
shape were used as a circulating medium in some districts. In welding
and hammering gold and silver they were the technical equals of the
goldsmiths of Europe of their day. Most of their cutting instruments,
however, were of stone.

They were lovers of brilliant colors, and decorated their costumes
and buildings with dyed stuffs, bright flowers, and the rich plumage
of tropical birds. Such feathers were also woven into mantles and
head-dresses of intricate designs and elaborate workmanship, an art
now lost. Their dyes were strong and permanent, some of them remaining
quite vivid after four centuries of exposure to the light.

In order to obtain the materials used in their arts and to exchange
their completed products, they carried on an active commerce, both
domestic and foreign. All the cities had market days, when the
neighboring country people would flock in great numbers to town, and
the journeys of their merchants extended far toward the Isthmus of
Panama.

The national religion was a polytheism built up on a totemic
worship; that is, it was originally a nature worship grafted upon
the superstitious devotion paid to the presiding genius of the
gens. Huitzilopochtli was the chief divinity of the Aztecs of
Tenochtitlan, Quetzalcoatl was especially adored at Cholula, and the
two Tezcatlipocas, the one dark and one white, were other prominent
mythical figures. According to the myth these four were brothers, but
engaged in a series of contentions among themselves, which repeatedly
wrecked the world.[187]

The Nahuas were by no means the only nation who had made decided
progress in culture. In Michoacan, to the northwest of the valley of
Mexico, dwelt the Tarascos. They spoke a totally different tongue, but
according to Aztec legend had accompanied the Nahua from a northern
region into their Mexican homes. Physically they are described as a
taller and handsomer folk than the Nahuas, with a language singularly
vocalic and musical. Bold in war, they were never subject to the
Aztecs, and appear to have been their equals in the arts. They
constructed houses of stone, and made use of a hieroglyphic writing to
preserve the records of their ancestors.[188]

The Mixtecs and Zapotecs were neighboring tribes, who lived on and near
the Pacific above the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. By tradition both nations
came together from the north; “mixtecatl” in Nahuatl means “people from
the cloudy land.” To them are attributed the remarkable edifices of
Mitla, stone-built structures, whose walls are elaborately ornamented
with rude stone mosaics in meander designs or “grecques.” The roofs
seem to have been supported by solid pillars of granite, some of which
are still in place. Of the age or purposes of these buildings we know
nothing, as they were deserted and in ruins when first visited by the
Spaniards.

There are many smaller tribes in Mexico of independent stocks, but
a catalogue of their names would be of little use. The most widely
distributed are the Otomis. They are of small stature, dolichocephalic,
and averse to civilization. According to tradition they are the oldest
occupants of the land, possessing it before the arrival of the Nahuas.
Their language in singularly difficult, nasal and primitive. In form it
is almost monosyllabic, with a tendency to isolation. This has led some
writers to believe it akin to the Chinese, for which there is not the
slightest ground.


_5. The Inter-Isthmian Group._

Between the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and that of Panama the continent
narrows to a point, and the pressure of the population advancing from
both directions forced a large number of diverse nationalities into
a limited area. Only one of these could lay claim to a respectable
civilization, most of the others living in primitive savagery.

This people, the Mayas, occupied the whole of the peninsula of Yucatan,
and the territory south of it to the Pacific Ocean. It was divided into
a number of independent tribes, the principal of which were the Quiches
and Cakchiquels, in the present State of Guatemala. In all there were
about eighteen dialects of the tongue, each of which can easily be
recognized as a member of the stock.

There can be little doubt that the common ancestors of these tribes
moved down from the north, following the shore of the Gulf of Mexico.
This is the statement of their most ancient traditions, and it is
supported by the presence of one of their tribes, the Huastecas, on
the shore of the Gulf, near Tampico. It has been calculated that their
entrance into Yucatan was about the beginning of the Christian era.

Physically the Maya peoples are of medium height, dark in hue, the
skull usually long (dolichocephalic), the nose prominent, and the
muscular force superior. The artist Waldeck compares their features to
those of the Arabs.

Their mental aptitudes are reflected in the culture they developed
under circumstances not the most favorable. As architects they
erected the most remarkable monuments on the continent. The elaborate
decorations in stone, the bold carving, the free employment of the
pointed arch, and the size of the edifices in the ancient cities of
Palenque, Copan, Uxmal, Chichen Itza, and others, place them in the
front rank among the wondrous ruins of the ancient world.

They were a decidedly agricultural people, cultivating maize, cotton,
tobacco, peppers, beans, and cacao. The land was portioned out with
care, each house-holder being granted an area in proportion to the
size of his family. The cotton was woven into cloth, skilfully dyed,
and cut into graceful garments. The dyes were vegetable substances,
collected from the native forests. What is not elsewhere paralleled in
America, they carried on an extensive apiculture, domesticating the
wild bee in wooden hives, and obtaining from its stores both wax and
honey.

Their weapons and utensils were mostly of stone. There is no evidence
that the Maya tribes had the metallurgical skill of the Nahuas.
Obsidian, jade, agate, and chert were the materials from which they
made their tools and weapons.

In war and the chase they were expert with the bow, the long lance, and
the blow-pipe or sarbacane, a device recurring in both North and South
America, as well as familiar to the Malays. The war-club, the sling and
the tomahawk or hand-axe were also known to them.

Small quantities of gold, silver and copper were found among them, but
not in objects of utility. They were prized as materials for ornaments,
and were employed for decorative purposes.

The art of writing was familiar to most of the Maya tribes, and
especially to those in Yucatan. The Spanish authors assert that the
Quiches in Guatemala had written annals extending eight hundred years
before the conquest, or to 750 A. D., and the chronicles of the Mayas
which have been preserved, refer to a still more remote past, possibly
to about 300 A. D. The script was quite dissimilar in appearance from
the Mexican.

Adjoining or near the numerous branches of the Maya peoples, there
dwelt several outliving colonies of Nahuas in the Isthmian region,
who have left there interesting relics of their culture. The Pipiles
near the Pacific coast were the authors of a series of excellent
bas-reliefs carved on slabs of stone, which have recently come into the
possession of the Berlin museum.[189] The Nicaraos, between the Pacific
Ocean and Lake Nicaragua, and on the islands in this lake, were the
sculptors of the strange figures in stone pictured by Squier in his
travels, and some of which are now in the Smithsonian museum; while the
Alaguilacs in Western Guatemala have left ruins which have not yet been
explored.[190] All these tribes were Nahuas of pure blood.

On the shores of Lake Managua, to the east and west, were the Mangues,
a people of some cultivation, acquainted with a form of hieroglyphic
or picture writing, very skilful in pottery, and agricultural in
habits.[191] It has been ascertained that they are a branch of the
Chapanecs, who dwelt in the province of Chiapas, Mexico.

The other tribes around Lake Nicaragua were wild. The Woolwas on the
north, and the Huatusos along the Rio Frio to the east, depended on
hunting and fishing for a livelihood. So also did most of the tribes of
Honduras, Vera Paz and the Isthmus. The only nation which distinguished
itself in the arts were the Cuevas, in and around Chiriqui Bay. They
were adroit in the treatment of gold. The early writers describe them
as prominent in general culture and certain technical arts. To them
we attribute the gold figures disinterred from the mounds of Chiriqui
and its neighborhood. They are manufactured by two methods, the one
by soldering gold wires drawn out into the finest thread upon thin
hammered plates of the same metal, the wire forming the design; the
other by casting hollow figures.[192] The skill displayed often excites
the astonishment of the jewellers of our own day.


_6. The South Atlantic Group._

The interminable forests of Brazil and the endless plains of the Pampas
were at the discovery thickly peopled by bands of roving nations,
dependent chiefly on the products of woods and streams for their
support. None of them had sedentary dwellings, none knew the art of
building with brick or stone, and none laid much stress on agriculture.
Some of them had, however, considerable technical skill in various
directions, and few if any of them could be assigned to as low a status
as the Australians, for example.

The ruling people on the northern coast and the Lesser Antilles at that
time were the _Caribs_. They possessed much of the coast line from the
Isthmus of Panama to the mouth of the Orinoco, and many of the smaller
southern islands of the West Indian archipelago. They had established
a colony on Hayti, but probably not on Cuba, and their expeditions,
so far as we know, never reached Florida. According to their own
statements, all the island Caribs came from the mainland at no long
period before the Discovery. Recent researches have shown that the
original home of the stock was south of the Amazon, and probably in the
highlands at the head of the Tapajoz River. A tribe, the Bakairi, is
still resident there, whose language is a pure and archaic form of the
Carib tongue.[193]

They were a finely formed set of men, the skull long but variable,
their color dark, large narrow nose, prominent cheek bones, wide mouth,
and thin lips.

Their language is rich in vowels and pleasant to the ear. In some
districts that spoken by the women varied in some degree from that
in use among the men. This is not without other examples among the
American race, and appears to have arisen partly from the custom of
capturing women from other tribes for wives, partly from a tendency to
easy dialectic variation in the languages themselves.

The _Arawaks_ occupied on the continent the area of the modern Guiana,
between the Corentyn and the Pomeroon rivers, and at one time all the
West Indian Islands. From some of them they were early driven by the
Caribs, and within forty year of the date of Columbus’ first voyage the
Spanish had exterminated nearly all on the islands. Their course of
migration had been from the interior of Brazil northward; their distant
relations are still to be found between the headwaters of the Paraguay
and Schingu rivers.

The extensive slope which is watered by the Amazon and its tributaries
is peopled by numerous tribes whose affinities are obscure. Those
on the plains near the coast belonged to the _Tupi-Guarani_ stock.
This extended along the Atlantic from Rio de la Plata to the Amazon,
embracing in the north the Tupis or Tupinambas, and on the south the
Guaranis. Scattered tribes of the stock extended westward to the
Paraguay and Madeira rivers, reaching to the foot hills of Andes.
Though positive data are lacking about their early migrations, the
evidence at hand tends to show that these were from south to north, and
that the Tupis displaced an earlier people of a different physical type
and a lower grade of culture.

This is the result derived both from a comparison of existing
dialects and from explorations in the artificial shell-heaps, or
_sambaquis_, which are found along the coast. Many of them are of
great size and very ancient. They contain skulls of an inferior type,
with low foreheads, prominent and strong jaws, and short skulls
(brachycephalic), while the Tupi skull is more fully developed and long
(dolichocephalic). Similar shell-heaps, proving an equally rude people,
are found along the coast of Guinea, and both among the Arawaks of
that locality, and still more among the Goajiros of the peninsula of
that name on the coast of Venezuela, who are distantly related to the
Arawaks, do we find the brachycephalic skull and strong jaws of the
builders of the “sambaquis.” We may suppose, therefore, that the Tupis
drove these earlier residents to the shores of the northern ocean.[194]

In frequent contiguity with the Tupis was another stock, also widely
dispersed through Brazil, called the _Tapuyas_, of whom the Botocudos
in eastern Brazil are the most prominent tribe. To them also belong the
Ges nations, south of the lower Amazon, and others. They are on a low
grade of culture, going quite naked, not cultivating the soil, ignorant
of pottery, and with poorly made canoes. They are dolichocephalic,
and must have inhabited the country for a long time, as the skulls
found in the caves at Lagoa Santa, in connection with the bones of
extinct animals, are identical in form with those of the Botocudos, and
probably belonged to their ancestors.

West of the Paraguay River is an extensive plain called El Gran Chaco,
beginning at the eighteenth degree of south latitude, and continuing
to the Pampas of Buenos Ayres. This region was peopled by numerous
wandering tribes, the Abipones, the Guaycurus, the Lules, and scores
of others. They were in nowise related to the Guaranis, having short
skulls, different linguistic stocks, and an inferior grade of culture.
As they were warlike, and in constant strife with the whites, as well
as among themselves, they have now nearly disappeared.

The tribes of the Pampas were on a similar plane of development, and
have also given way before the march of the white race.

In the extreme south of the continent are the Patagonians and Fuegians.
The former are sometimes called Tehuelches, or Southerners. They are a
nomadic and hunting people, dark olive-brown in color, tall in stature
and robust.

The Fuegians are generally quoted as among the most miserable of
savages. Though exposed to a damp and cold climate and always
insufficiently nourished, they wear scarcely any clothing, and are
content with wretched huts of branches and weeds. They have long
skulls (about 75), long, narrow eyes, well-shaped noses, and generally
are good specimens of one of the American types. Their language is
eminently polysynthetic and rich in terms to express the objects and
incidents of their daily life.


_7. The South Pacific Group._

The principal nations in the South Pacific group are the Chibchas and
the Qquichuas.

The former, called also Muyscas, resided near the Magdalena River,
near the present city of Bogota. They were sedentary, agricultural,
and skilful in a number of arts. Their agriculture extended to maize,
potatoes, cotton, yucca and other vegetables, and their fields were
irrigated by canals. As potters and goldsmiths they ranked among the
finest on the continent, and both for symmetry of form and richness of
decoration some of the vases from their district cannot be surpassed
from American products.

The most powerful and cultivated of the South American nations were
the Qquichuas of Peru. Originally they were a small tribe near Lake
Titicaca, where they dwelt in close relations to the Aymaras. About
1000 A. D., their chief, Manco Capac, conquered the valleys to the
north and founded the city of Cuzco. His successors added to the
territory of the state until it extended from a few degrees north of
the equator to about 20° south latitude, or a distance along the coast
of over 1500 miles. In width it varied from 200 to 400 miles. Of course
it embraced a variety of distinct stocks, so that it is impossible
to speak of any “Peruvian” type of skull or features, the less so as
it was the policy of the Incas, as the rulers were called, to remove
conquered tribes to distant parts of the realm.

The social organization of Peru rested upon the political union of
clans or gentes, as it did in most other American nations. The ruler of
the realm acted in accordance with the advice of the council elected
by the gentes, but also exercised at times an autocratic power, and
it would be an error to consider him not more independent than the
war-chief of one of the hunting tribes. The office was hereditary in
the female line, provided a satisfactory candidate appeared; otherwise
it was elective.[195]

No American nation surpassed the Peruvians in agricultural arts. Maize,
cotton, coca, potatoes, and tobacco were the principal crops. As the
arable land in the narrow vales of their country was limited, they
increased its extent by constructing terraces along the mountain sides,
and to guard against the aridity, numerous dams were built, from which
canals carried the water for miles to the various fields. Fertilizers
were dug into the soil, and a rotation of crops observed to prevent its
exhaustion. The domestication of animals had advanced further in Peru
than elsewhere on the continent. Besides the dog, and a fowl like a
goose, they had large herds of lamas, an animal they used for food and
also for carrying burdens, though its chief value was its wool. This
was spun and woven into articles of clothing, mats, etc. Quantities
of cloth from this substance and from cotton are exhumed from the
ancient tombs. The specimens are often in good preservation, showing
geometrical designs worked with symmetry, and dyed of various bright
colors.

In the mountain regions the houses were generally of stone, and
in the arid coast lands, of sun-dried bricks. They were located in
groups surrounded by walls, also of stone or brick. The stones were
sometimes fitted together with extraordinary nicety, or elsewhere were
united with mortar or cement. Recent travellers have stated that the
stone-work on some of the ruins of the Inca palaces is equal to that in
any part of the world; this is especially true of the mysterious ruins
of Tiahuanaco, near Lake Titicaca, where some of the most complete work
on the continent is to be found.

These architects had not discovered the pointed arch, as had the Mayas,
and in the details of their structures, as in the forms of their doors
and the perfect simplicity of their walls, it is clearly seen that they
had no connection with the northern civilizations. The structures were
rarely erected on pyramids or mounds, and frequently were of several
stories in height.

Their skill in the reduction and manufacture of various metals excited
the admiration of the Europeans. Among the articles they offered the
Spaniards were utensils, both solid and hollow, of gold, imitations of
fruits and animals of the same substance, golden butterflies, idols,
birds, masks, and mace-heads. Groups of half a dozen figures in various
attitudes have been found of solid silver, the symmetry and expression
being well preserved.

There was a like exuberance in the forms they gave their pottery.
The jars and vases were imitations of every kind of object around
them--fish, birds, reptiles, fruits, men, houses. Often the product
is so symmetrical that one is tempted to believe it was formed by a
potter’s wheel; but this invention, so ancient in the old world, was
never known to the American Race. Curious ingenuity is displayed in the
production of whistling or musical jars, which will emit a note when
the fluid is poured in; or trick-jars, which cannot be emptied unless
turned in a certain direction, not at first obvious. The art of glazing
was not known, and most of the pottery seems to have been sun-dried
only.

With the materialistic notions of religion and of a future life which
they entertained, it was regarded of the utmost importance that
the body should be preserved undisturbed in the tomb. Hence it was
often carefully mummified, and the sepulchres were selected in the
most secret and inaccesible location, either a cave on the side of a
precipice, or if in the plains the grave was levelled, so that no sign
of it appeared on the surface.

South of the Peruvian monarchy were the Araucanians, occupying the
area of the modern state of Chili. They were a warlike, hunting race,
physically and also linguistically akin to the tribes of the Pampas.
Neither the Incas nor the Spaniards succeeded in reducing their
indomitable spirit. In culture they had gained an advantage over the
Pampean tribes by their relations to the Qquichuas, but were far behind
the latter in general aptitude in the arts. Much of their subsistence
was dependent on the chase, and they are not classed among the partly
civilized natives of the continent. They are described as tall and
robust, the skull brachycephalic, the face round, the nose short and
rather flattened.



LECTURE X.

PROBLEMS AND PREDICTIONS.

    CONTENTS.--I. ETHNOGRAPHIC PROBLEMS. 1. The problem of acclimation.
    Various answers. Europeans in the tropics. Austafricans in cold
    climates; in warm climates. The Asian race. Tolerance of the
    American race. Theories of acclimation. Conclusion. 2. The problem
    of amalgamation. Effect on offspring. Mingling of white and black
    races. Infertility. Mingling of colored races. Influence of
    early and present social conditions. Is amalgamation desirable?
    As applied to white race; to colored races. 3. The problem of
    civilization. Urgency of the problem. Influence of civilization
    on savages. Failure of missionary efforts. Cause of the failure.
    Suggestions.

    II. THE DESTINY OF RACES. Extinction of Races. The American race.
    Are the Indians dying out? Conflicting statements. They are
    perishing. Diminution of insular peoples; causes of fatality. The
    Austafrican race. The Mongolian race stationary. Wonderful growth
    of the Eurafrican race. Influence of the Semitic element. The
    future Aryo-Semitic race.

    Relation of ethnography to historical and political science.


The population of the world in this year of 1890 is estimated at over
fifteen hundred millions. This vast multitude have passed in review
before us in their races, peoples and nations. What is the future of
these jostling millions, each individual of whom is striving after some
goal, seeking to satisfy some desire?

This momentous question depends directly on the solution of certain
problems with which the ethnographer especially has to deal. On the
right reading of these problems rests the destiny of races, and on the
destiny of races hangs the fate of Man. We shall do well therefore to
take home from the study of this science the horoscope it forecasts.

The first of these inquiries is


_The Problem of Acclimation._

How far can the various races not merely support and live through, but
do good work in the varied climates of the world?

Never was this question so urgent as to-day. With fleets of steamships
ploughing every ocean, and the iron horse racing on its steel track
over every continent, the movement of men is conducted in such masses
and with such rapidity that the most extensive migrations of nations of
other ages seem insignificant in comparison.

Like many other questions in ethnography, this one has been answered
very variously, too often, evidently, by writers influenced by other
motives than a single desire to reach the truth. It has been in close
proximity to political and social movements, and facts have been
twisted to serve the purposes of advocates.

The facts, indeed, are easily liable to misinterpretation. Take the
white race, for instance. It has for centuries possessed flourishing
colonies not only in the southern temperate zone, which would not
surprise us, but under the torrid suns of India, Mexico and Brazil,
in Java and the Isle of France, in the West and East Indies, not to
speak of the Hamitic tribes, who thousands of years ago established
themselves on the borders of the Sudan (see above, p. 116). Long before
that, the Indo-Aryans had crossed the Hindu Kush and extended their
sway over the Dravidian peoples of Hindostan.

But in these tropical regions have they not merely existed, but
also prospered? Have they retained, along with the purity of their
blood, also their fecundity, their viability and their energy? I
must reply emphatically, No. In the words of a medical observer of
ample experience in the tropics--“The changes which a torrid climate
impresses upon the constitution of Europeans and upon their descendants
are pathological, and tend with fatal certainty to the extinction of
the race.”[196] In India the children of English parents must be sent
back to Great Britain or they will perish. It is said that in the
history of the civil service there has not been a single family which
survived three generations. Even the first generation loses the energy
which characterizes the parental stock. The whites nowhere in the
tropics can undergo continuous physical toil exposed to the sun. They
are always found subsisting on the labor of the native races.

The Spanish and Portuguese population of tropical America have survived
in their new home for nearly four hundred years. But when have they
displayed the astonishing energy of the early _Conquistadores_? Many
of the so-called Spanish creoles are really of mixed blood. In Peru
and Mexico it is hard to find a family without the strain of another
race in its pedigree. In Cuba, where there has been the least exposure
to this result, owing to the prompt extinction of the natives, the
descendants of the early European immigrants are enfeebled and
infertile. While in Mexico, in Guatemala, and in Yucatan, the men of
prominent energy are either of mixed blood or, like the late Governor
Barrios, are of the once conquered, the pure American race. I do not
call a race acclimated which merely manages to exist, at the sacrifice
of those qualities which are its highest claim to distinction.

On the other hand, the black race finds it hopeless to struggle with
the climate above the fortieth parallel of latitude. In no portion of
Southern Europe did it ever maintain itself, and when its members were
carried in numbers as slaves to Mauritius and Ceylon, they succumbed
to the change.[197] Even in Africa it is doubtful if it ever effected
a permanent settlement on the shores of the Mediterranean. Pulmonary
diseases and scrofula are the chief morbid changes which destroy its
emigrants.

In the West Indies and generally in tropical and sub-tropical America
they seem to flourish. In the United States the “colored people”
increase by birth more rapidly in proportion than the whites, though
this calculation includes the mulattoes and others of mixed blood.

Whether the Asian race has greater or less powers of acclimation
than others is a question of much significance at present, when the
teeming millions of the Celestial empire seem ready to pour forth in
resistless floods over the whole earth. We are not prepared to reply.
The subjection of this race to foreign climatic influences has been too
recent and under conditions too exceptional to furnish the requisite
data; and in their own land, the Chinese, from whom we look for the
most portentous migrations, have lived in a country which does not
present contrasts equal to those of the various zones.

The American race may be regarded as an exception to the others. The
area it always occupied extended from one polar circle to the other,
including every degree of altitude, and every extreme of temperature to
which man is exposed. No difference in the viability or the energy of
its members in various parts of the continent can be noted. The most
remarkable monuments of its toilsome industry were completed under the
tropical sun of Yucatan; while one of the most ingenious of its tribes
lived the farthest north of any human beings. The physical energy of
the stalwart Patagonian is not superior to that of the active Carib or
the northern Algonkin. We may possibly find the explanation of this in
the trend of the chief mountains and rivers of the continent, which
facilitated easy progress from north to south, while in the eastern
hemisphere the trend running parallel with the latitude, separated the
early peoples into smaller climatic areas.

While the facts so far as ascertained seem to point to the decision
that each race is confined to climatic conditions similar to that of
its original area of characterization, the theory has been advanced
that this is but for a time, that by persistence and repeated
sacrifices of the unfit, finally a remnant will survive fully able to
face the novel trials of the climatic change.[198]

This, however, is a theory only. It may be allowed credence to the
extent that the survival of a remnant is possible; but it would be at
the sacrifice of the distinctive qualities of the higher races; those
can flourish only under the physical conditions which gave them birth.

It has also been urged that the improved sanitary hygienic science of
modern times will do efficient battle against the lethal influences of
strange climes. Doubtless in individual cases such precautions are of
the highest value; they aid the system in withstanding malarial and
zymotic poisons; but the best of them, employed on the widest scale,
will prove sadly inadequate, as is shown by their failure in many a
tract in the temperate zone. If we cannot restore salubrity to the
Roman Campagna, or to Staten Island in New York Harbor, it is more than
wild to talk of rendering healthful the Congo Basin.

I am tempted, therefore, to consider this problem of acclimation
insoluble, and to express myself in the words of the learned physician
I have already quoted, “There is no such thing as acclimation. A race
never was acclimated, and in the present condition of the world, a race
never can become acclimated.”[199]

The second of our inquiries relates to


_The Problem of Amalgamation_

--that which the French call _métissage_ and the Americans
_miscegenation_. The fact that we have manufactured this “recent and
ill-formed word,” as Webster’s _Unabridged_ calls it, is evidence
that the questions involved in this problem touch us nearly. They
touch the whole world, and very closely. I know of nothing within
the range of human power to control, more decisive of the future
prosperity or failure of the human species than this of the effect of
race-intermarriage.

The consequences of such blendings may be studied with reference to the
viability of the offspring, their mental faculties, and their fecundity.

At the outset it is important to premise that the question cannot
be treated as simple and single. It is complex. The results of
race-crossings differ with races and with evironment. The law that
applies to one case in one place is not certainly good in other cases
and elsewhere.

It seems, for instance, tolerably certain that the cross between the
white and black races produces offspring (mulattoes) who are deficient
in physical vigor. It is well ascertained in the United States that
they are peculiarly prone to scrofula and consumption, unable to bear
hard work, and shorter lived than either the full black or the white.
This is not owing to our climate, as the same results are recognized
by the negroes of the Gold Coast, who for four hundred years have been
in constant contact with the whites.[200] In the West India Islands,
the mulattoes must be constantly reinforced by new crossings, or they
disappear.

The fertility of such unions, though generally equal if the number
of births alone is considered, is really less on account of the
greater mortality of the infants. As a rule, the third generation
of descendants of a marriage between the white and the Polynesian,
Australian or Dravidian, become extinct through short lives, feeble
constitutions or sterility. According to one writer, except a few small
islands in the Pacific, there is not an instance of a modern population
of mixed white blood, living by itself, which is not on the road to
extinction.[201]

It is not certain that this applies either to the crossing of the
Eurafrican or the African with the American race. The half-breed
between the negro and the Indian, of which we have examples in the
Cafusos of Brazil, the Zambos of Paraguay, the Chinos of Peru, and
the “Black Caribs” of St. Vincent, are said to be finely formed and
vigorous. Throughout Mexico, Central and South America, there has
been a blending of the white and red races on an enormous scale, and
the result has been that both physically and mentally this mixed race
has repeatedly taken precedence in political and social life over the
pure descendants of the European colonists. It is well-known that the
half-breeds of our frontiers, of British America and of Greenland, are
singularly hardy, intelligent and vigorous scouts, guides, hunters
and soldiers. Not a few of them have distinguished themselves in our
colleges, and later in clerical and political life.

It would appear also that in the earlier conditions of social life, no
such debility attended the crossing of the Eurafrican and African race
as seems at present to be the case. The only physiological explanation
which can be offered of the numerous negroid tribes of eastern and
southern Africa, is that they are the descendants of prolonged and
intimate unions between the pure negroes and members of the Hamitic and
Semitic divisions of the white race (see above, p. 185). This permits
the suggestion that there are special causes now at work which alter
the influences of race-mixture from what they once were.

Some of them are patent. In modern times it is an almost universal law
that all mixed-white populations derive their white blood exclusively
from the father, their dark blood exclusively from the mother. I
do not know that I can tell you precisely what effect this would
have,[202] but it is certain that such a divergence from what is
customary within the race limits would exert a decided influence both
physically and socially. It is generally believed among students of
heredity that the psychical qualities are inherited more from the
mother, the physical more from the father; and if this holds good
in most cases, we should expect the children of such unions to be
intellectually inferior to the average of their parents. This I think
is true. Advocates of miscegenation, such as de Quatrefages, Serres and
others, are apt to draw a different conclusion, because they compare
the average intellectual ability of the products of such unions with
the average of the lower race, and this is certainly in favor of the
mixed stock, but is an unscientific procedure.

It is also true that in perhaps ninety per cent. of the cases, these
mixed unions are illegal, and the children suffer under the stigma of
illegitimacy. This means more or less deficiency in home training,
education, legal protection, and social recognition. In primitive
conditions this was not the case, and hence race minglings at that time
were under far more favorable auspices.

In most modern communities the prejudice against members or partial
members of the dark races forces them to rest content with unequal
advantages, if not educational, at least social, and the recognition
of these invisible barriers must necessarily have a deteriorating
influence on ambition. This of course was not the case in primitive
society, where no other power was recognized than that of the strong
right arm.

The possibility of a vigorous and fertile cross-race under certain
conditions seems therefore to have been demonstrated by the past
history of the species. Is it a desirable result in itself? May we look
forward to the commingling of races as worth the fostering care of
states and societies? The question bristles with difficulties--moral,
not physical difficulties.

There can be no doubt but that any white mixed race is lower in the
scale of intelligence than the pure white race. A white man entails
indelible degradation on his descendants who takes in marriage a woman
of a darker race; and any relation other than that of marriage, no
matter if it does lift the lower race, is unauthorized by any sound
moral code. Still more to be deplored is the woman of the white race
who unites herself with a man of a lower ethnic type. It cannot be
too often repeated, too emphatically urged, that it is to the women
alone of the highest race that we must look to preserve the purity of
the type, and with it the claims of the race to be the highest. They
have no holier duty, no more sacred mission, than that of transmitting
in its integrity the heritage of ethnic endowment gained by the race
through thousands of generations of struggle. That philanthropy is
false, that religion is rotten, which would sanction a white woman
enduring the embrace of a colored man.

The two problems we have now discussed seem to present a dilemma. The
pure races do not flourish out of their physiological surroundings;
and yet some of them are not adequate for the work required by modern
culture. What resource have we? The answer is, in the union of the
lower races among themselves, especially the Mongolian and the African.
Thus we may expect a blending capable of resisting the heat of the
tropics, and intelligent enough to carry out the directions of that
race which will ever and everywhere maintain its supremacy so long as
it maintains its ethnic purity--the Eurafrican.

Let us now turn to


_The Problem of Civilization._

It is one which has arisen within the last two or three centuries, and
is now so urgent that it will have an instant reply. With increased
means of locomotion and augmented love of progress, civilization is
now transported, with all its complex forces, to every nation and
every tribe, no matter where or of what race, and the question is
put point blank, Will you accept this precious gift, or will you
have it forced upon you, with such results as may happen? Japan has
welcomed the message, inscrutable China hesitates, Persia wavers, the
miserable Australians refuse, the savages turn their back--all in vain;
the message is importunate, will take no denial, must be accepted.
Opposition means destruction. The Bechuana kraal which refuses to have
a grand opera house and electric lights, if the European sees fit to
put them there, will be wiped out of existence. So will every tribe,
every nation, every race, which sets forth to oppose the resistless
flow of civilized progress.

Preservation, however, and not destruction, is the maxim of the ripest
culture. The Tasmanian is extinct, the Polynesian disappearing, many
an American tribe lives only in name, all gone down before the fierce
flames of a civilization which did not lighten, but consumed them. Many
another people is disappearing in the same way, in spite of the devoted
efforts of earnest men and women to save them, to bring them into
accord with the thought of the higher race, to teach them the boundless
blessings of European enlightenment.

What is the history of these efforts? Failure, and yet again failure.
Consider the history of the attempts to bring the American race into
accord with the European. There were the noble endeavors of the Jesuits
in Paraguay, the untiring zeal of the Franciscans in Yucatan, the
admirable devotion of the Moravian brethren in the northern continent,
and the long list of missionary societies in Protestant churches. These
represent the most sustained, unselfish and enlightened efforts which
have ever been made to civilize the Indians. They are of the same
nature and on the same plan as those which have been and still are
directed toward other savage peoples, the Polynesians and Africans for
example.

Have they been successful? Can an instance be adduced where they have
achieved a full and permanent introduction of a savage tribe to the
real benefits of our civilization?

I cannot answer for the history of missions throughout the world, but
I can and do for my special field, America, and I say, not a single
instance of success can be named. The Jesuits and the Moravians
succeeded, indeed, in reclaiming the natives from their wild life;
they transformed them from warring savages into peaceful planters;
from drunken, cruel and superstitious, they made them sober, kind
and religious. This was a noble, an admirable result. But were their
converts any the more able to accept the civilization of Europe? Not a
whit. David Zeisberger’s last sermon was a wail that his sixty years’
of missionary work had failed to accomplish this result. Ten years
after the expulsion of the Jesuits from Paraguay, their extensive
“reductions,” which at one time included thirty or forty thousand
Christianized natives, were a heap of ruins, and the converts dispersed
to the four winds--and this after nearly two centuries of training!

Should we conclude from these sad histories that it is impossible to
bring the existing savage nations into accord with our own culture?
This is not my conclusion. Rather I infer that we have not tried the
proper measures. We have relied almost exclusively on missionary
religious work, forgetting that our religion is only one part of our
civilization, and, so far as it is dogmatic and ceremonial, much the
least part. We have been singularly inconsequent. We send our own
children six days to a secular school, and only on the seventh to a
Sunday-school; but the poor Indian we send to Sunday-school all seven
days, and then expect him to have an education like our own! Our
missionaries hold up to the savage pictures of Christian brotherhood,
of unselfish motive, of universal charity, which he soon finds have
no existence in Christian communities or modern civilization. If he
is an honest convert, he is absolutely disqualified from contact with
civilized peoples! The Jesuits and the Moravians, both practical
orders, knew this well, and therefore not only prevented their acolytes
learning European tongues, but used every means at their command to
banish all relations between the two races in those under their control.

It may seem uncharitable in me to oppose and condemn missionary
enterprises in savage communities; but I do so under the full
conviction that as usually conducted they fail, and are bound to fail,
in the most excellent aim they have in view. To succeed, they should
be combined with a broad secular education, with a full recognition
of the real impulses of modern life, and an effort to inculcate sound
principles rather than respect for ceremonies and dogmas, about
which the Christian sects themselves are never in unison. The native
religious and moral codes should be studied, and all that is good in
them--generally there is a great deal of good--should be retained;
right actions should be based on respect for law, on the inherent sense
of justice, on natural affection, and not merely on ecclesiastical
edicts. Above all, independence of thought should be encouraged, the
principles of religious and political freedom should be held up as
superior to those of subjection, and the convert should be instructed
that attachment to any particular creed is in no wise requisite to
enjoy the best results of civilization.

It may be objected that doctrines such as these would leave the
missionary as such little to teach. I reply that these doctrines are
true, and are those necessary to the reception of civilization, and
if they are omitted or obscured, the missionary is not an apostle of
light, but of darkness, and that his efforts will prove unsuccessful in
the future, as they have in the past.

The consideration of this problem of civilization leads us to cast a
glance at the future and to ponder on


_The Destiny of Races._

We are well aware that many a family, many a tribe, many a linguistic
stock, has perished off the face of the earth, leaving no trace of its
existence. Of others we know but the “naked nominations.” May not whole
races have followed the same fatal course? Nay, more, may not some of
the existing races be likewise doomed, as the mature tree, to fall and
disappear?

It was the opinion of the learned Broca that certain osseous remains in
Europe point to a race once there entirely unlike any other, modern
or ancient.[203] The gloomy precedent is established, therefore, and
we have to reflect if it applies to any now living varieties of our
species.

Beginning at home, we may first inquire concerning the American race.
The question, Are the Indians dying out? was investigated some years
ago by learned authorities at Washington, who announced the cheerful
result that, contrary to the universal opinion, the red man is not
decreasing at all, but increasing in numbers![204]

I have studied these pleasing statements with care, and regret that
I do not reach the same satisfactory conclusions. The writers in
question take no account of the signs of a dense ancient population
in the Ohio valley, in Michigan, in Florida, in the Pueblo region;
they take for granted that the estimates of all the early voyagers
and travelers were gross exaggerations; they pay no attention to the
historic fact that the natives of the Atlantic coast suffered severely
from epidemic diseases before the English established their first
settlements, diseases probably disseminated from the Spanish colonies
in Florida or Mexico; finally, they commit the fatal ethnographic error
of confounding under the name “Indians” both the pure and the mixed
members of the race.

This last oversight vitiates all the argument. No one is prepared
to say that some faint strain of native American blood may not be
perpetuated indefinitely. But this is not the survival of the race or
of the “Indians,” any more than the Normans survive to-day in England.

My own studies convince me that the American race is and has long
been disappearing, both actually, tribe by tribe, and relatively, by
admixture with the whites. In our own area there were many tribes once
of considerable numbers, who have become wholly extinct. The Timucuas
of Florida, the Catawbas of South Carolina, the Monacans of Virginia,
the Mohegans of New York, the Boethucs of Newfoundland, have no living
representatives. The whole of the inhabitants of the Bahamas and
Greater Antilles were hurried to destruction in a couple of generations
after the discovery by Columbus. The list would be long were I to
recapitulate the dead languages known by name or by a few sentences in
some old missionary book, to the student of American linguistics.

The process is not suspended. Beginning at the north with the Eskimos,
we find their number steadily diminishing;[205] the Athabascas,
according to Petitot, are but a wreck of their former selves; of the
tribes of the United States, Miss Alice Fletcher, who has traveled
extensively among them, assures me that in a few generations there will
be scarcely any of pure descent surviving; and I have noted for myself
on the reservations what an increasing proportion of the young people
reveal the infusion of European blood.

The same is true all over the Continent. The American Indian, as such,
is destined to disappear before European civilization. If he retains
his habits he will be exterminated; if he aims to preserve an unmixed
descent, he will be crushed out by disease and competition; his only
resource is to blend his race with the whites, and this infallibly
means his disappearance from the scene.

The Island World, extending from Easter Island to Madagascar, presents
the same spectacle. The aboriginal, undersized Negritos have long
disappeared from many of the larger islands where they lived in
historic times; and on the Philippines and elsewhere the report is that
they are slowly but steadily drifting toward annihilation.[206] The
Tasmanians have perished to the last man; the Australians are one-fifth
what they were estimated by the best authorities at the beginning of
the century; the Maoris of New Zealand have lessened one-half; the
natives of Easter Island have sunk from twenty-five hundred in 1850
to less than three hundred; and so on for nearly all the Polynesian
islands.

This extreme fatality has received the earnest attention of
philanthropists and scientific physicians. Its causes are visible.
They are the introduction of new epidemics, as measles, small-pox,
syphilis and consumption, the last mentioned peculiarly fatal, and
now recognized as eminently contagious under certain conditions; an
increased infant mortality; drunkenness and its consequences; and
diminished fecundity in the women. This last is both one of the most
potent and one of the obscurest of the causes of diminished population.
Why at some certain period a people should be smitten with sterility is
a mysterious fact, for which the explanation must be postponed until
we become better acquainted with the many enigmas which surround the
process of reproduction.

Add to the death-rate the considerable percentage of children who are
born of unions with the White, the Asian or the African races, and are
thus no longer representatives of the ancestral stock, and we must
acknowledge that these insular peoples are in no better, even a worse
case than the American Indians. They, too, are sitting beneath the
Damocles sword of extinction.

Such an assertion is doubtfully applicable to the Austafrican race. I
have already referred to some statistics showing its heavy mortality
in the isles of France and Ceylon, and the German ethnographer Ratzel
is inclined to believe that it is diminishing in Central Africa
itself.[207] But the census returns of our own country and of the West
Indies show a positive and rapid increase particularly if we include
the large population of mixed blood.

We have been taught in this country to look with something like terror
on the teeming millions of China, only awaiting the chance to overrun
the whole earth, underbid all other laborers, profit by the fruits of
our more liberal governments and nobler religions, and give nothing
in return. A few centuries ago a still more dreadful fear haunted the
nations of Europe that some other Timurlane or Genghis Khan would
lead his countless hordes of merciless Mongolians from the steppes of
Siberia across the cultivated fields of the Danube to wipe out, as with
a sponge, the glorious picture of renascent European culture.

The latter fear no longer disturbs any mind. The mightiest of the
Tartar powers is but a shadow, maintained by the mutual jealousy of
Europeans themselves; the illimitable steppes of Tartary and Mongolia
acknowledge the suzerainty of the Slavonian; and the nomadic hordes of
the steppes and tundras are steadily diminishing under the same baneful
influences of civilization which are blighting the Australian and the
American.

Whether this is true also of the Sinitic stocks, especially of the
Chinese, we have no positive information. It has been rumored that of
late years repeated periods of drought, resulting in disastrous famine,
have materially reduced the population of the interior of China, many
perishing and others removing nearer the coast. As it is only near the
coast that foreigners have the opportunity to observe the people, it
is likely that they bring away an exaggerated notion of the density of
population in the country at large. It is at any rate doubtful if the
Chinese are more than stationary.

Widely different is the vista which appears before us when we
contemplate the Eurafrican race. It goes forth conquering and to
conquer, extending its empire over all continents and to the remotest
islands of the sea. Never has that progress been so rapid as to-day.
Two centuries ago the whole of the white race which could lay claim
to purity of blood numbered not over one hundred millions, or ten per
cent. of the population of the world, and was confined to the limits
of Europe and North Africa; now the European branch of it alone counts
nearly five hundred millions, or one-third of the whole. In the year
1800, the non-resident whites of European descent were ten millions;
now they are over eighty millions. Every navy and every army of any
fighting capacity belong to the European whites and their descendants.
No nation and no race of other lineage dare withstand an attack or
disobey an order from a leading European power. Africa and Asia are
dismembered and parceled out at London, Berlin and St. Petersburg,
and no one dreams of asking the consent of the inhabitants of those
continents.

This astonishing progress is not due alone to the North Mediterranean
branch of the Eurafrican race. The representatives of the South
Mediterranean branch are for a large part in it. In the forefront of
it, whether in the great capitals of Europe or in the pioneer towns
of the frontiers, we find the acute and versatile Semite, full of
energy and knowledge, guiding in councils, his master hand on the
levers of the vastest financial schemes, his subtle policy governing
the diplomacy of statesmen and the decisions of directors. As Prof.
Gerland has well said, there is something in the Semitic character
which is complementary to that of the Aryan,[208] and it is not without
significance that the surprising development of the latter began when
the religious prejudices against the Jews commenced to yield to more
enlightened sentiments. They are now the growing people. Statistics
show that in Europe, while the Aryac population doubles in number in
thirty-four years, the Semites double in twenty-five years, having
more children to a marriage and less infantile mortality.[209] When
bigotry ceases on both sides, and free inter-marriage restores the
Aryo-Semitic stock to its original unity, we may look for a race of
nobler capacities than any now existing.

Still more rapid would that progress be, still more beneficent would
be the sway of European civilization, could the great powers of that
continent lay aside unworthy jealousies, and agree to extend in harmony
the blessings of just government and sound education over other races.
An unreasoning distrust has prevented the removal of the barbaric
Sibiric power which centers at Constantinople; and the excellent
results of the extension of the Slavonian supremacy in Central Asia
have been studiously ignored by British writers.

Reflections such as these teach us how closely the study of
ethnographic science is related to practical politics. Ethnography,
indeed, is the necessary basis of correct history and sound
statesmanship. It offers to history a foundation on natural law; it
explains events by showing their dependence on the physical structure,
the mental pecularities, and the geographic surroundings of the peoples
engaged in them; it presents, in its present pictures of savage life,
the condition of the highest nations in the earlier stages of their
culture.

To the statesman it offers those facts about the capacities and
limitations of peoples which should guide his dealings with them;
it comes with no vague theory of optimism or pessimism, such as
doctrinaire philosophers love to air, but with the admonition that each
people, each race, must be studied by itself, free from bias, free from
bigotry, and with the conviction that no matter what metaphysics say,
any nation, as any man, may lift itself by the recognition of those
indefeasible and universal elements of the mind, the “I,” the “ought,”
and the “can”--the reverence of self, the respect for duty, and the
devotion to freedom.

                  “Man who man would be,
    Must rule the empire of himself; in it
    Must be supreme, establishing his throne
    On vanquished will, quelling the anarchy
    Of hopes and fears, being himself alone.”



INDEX OF AUTHORS.


  Abel, C., 150.

  Achelis, T., 95.

  Allen, H., 27.

  Andree, R., 45.

  Avienus, R. F., 122.


  Barth, R., 116, 119, 122.

  Bartels, M., 40.

  Bastian, A., 95, 237, 243, 266.

  Beddoe, J., 31, 146.

  Beauregard, O., 231.

  Berendt, C. H., 267.

  Bergaigne, A., 170.

  Berthelot, S., 116, 117.

  Bertin, G., 132.

  Bissuell, H., 126.

  Bleicher, Dr., 90.

  Blumentritt, F., 225, 226, 295.

  Boas, F., 258.

  Bonaparte, R., 213.

  Borsari, F., 117.

  Brinton, D. G., 54, 61, 71, 75, 122, 124, 255, 262, 266.

  Broca, P., 30, 117, 120, 143, 292.

  Brugmann, K., 151.

  Brühl, G., 273.

  Bunsen, 123.

  Brugsch, 124.


  Callimachus, 117.

  Candolle, A. de, 39, 109, 147.

  Cartailhac, E., 90.

  Castelnau, F. de, 224.

  Chantre, E., 172.

  Chudzinski, 30.

  Clark, S. N., 293.

  Collignon, R., 90, 118.

  Cope, E. D., 27.

  Curr, E. N., 241.

  Curtius, 159.


  Dall, W. H., 215.

  Dallas, J., 226.

  Dally, 284.

  Darwin, C., 20, 43, 85, 86, 95, 219, 284, 293.

  Delattre, A. L., 130.

  Delisle, F., 192.

  Delitzsch, 126.

  Deniker, J., 215.

  Doughty, 134.

  Du Chaillu, 178, 296.

  Duncker, Max, 159, 160.

  Duveyrier, 126.


  Earl, G. W., 237, 240.

  Ella, L., 228.

  Emin Bey, 178.

  D’Escayrac de Lauture, 201, 203, 216.


  Faidherbe, 117, 120.

  Faurot, L., 132.

  Finsch, O., 221, 227, 228, 234, 238.

  Fletcher, A., 294.

  Fligier, Dr., 123, 139, 148, 159.

  Flower, W. H., 27, 226.

  Fornander, 236.

  Fritsch, N., 179.


  Gaudry, A., 85.

  Geiger, L., 148.

  Gerland, G., 191, 299.

  Glaser, E., 133.

  Gooch, W. D., 91.


  Habel, S., 266.

  Haeckel, E., 32, 223.

  Hahn, T., 180.

  Hale, H., 61, 229, 237, 240.

  Halevy, 125, 126.

  Haliburton, R. G., 132.

  Hamy, 233, 240.

  Harris, W. B., 117.

  Haughton, S., 94.

  Haynes, W. W., 129.

  Herodotus, 121, 166.

  Hervé, G., 160, 165, 217, 232, 280, 284.

  Hobbes, 76.

  Holden, L., 20, 29.

  Hooker, J., 126.

  Hopkins, S. W., 256.

  Hovelacque, A., 160, 217, 232.

  Humboldt, W., 122, 150.

  Huxley, 89.


  Kant, E., 59.

  Keane, A. H., 213, 233.

  Kölliker, A., 29.

  Kollman, J., 108.

  Krause, A., 258.

  Kulischer, M., 59.

  Kuun, G., 166.


  Lang, R. H., 160.

  Lapouge, G. de, 129, 147.

  Latham, R. G., 146.

  Leclerc, 179.

  Lenormant, 122.

  Lesson, 236.

  Lubbock, J., 67, 90.

  Lumholtz, C., 55, 240, 241.

  Lyman, B. S., 217.


  Mackenzie, J., 192.

  Mallery, G., 293.

  Man, E. H., 225.

  Mantegazza, 197.

  Martinet, 236.

  Martins, von, 270.

  Matthews, W., 23.

  Maury, 239.

  Meyer, A. B., 227.

  Meyer, K., 42.

  Michel, F., 252.

  Montaigne, 58.

  Montano, J., 226.

  Morgan, L. H., 58, 101.

  Morse, E. S., 34, 94.

  Mortillet, G., 85, 89.

  Müller, Fr., 115, 122, 188, 210, 214, 230, 232, 239.

  Müller, M., 83, 144.

  Müller, Dr. M., 124.


  Nansen, F., 294.

  Newman, 122.

  Nordenskiold, N. A. E., 214.


  D’Omalius, d’Halloy, 93, 146, 148, 166.

  Orgeas, J., 279, 283.


  Packard, A. T., 249.

  Palgrave, G., 132.

  Penka, C., 147, 162.

  Peschel, O., 20, 223.

  Petitot, E., 251.

  Pitt-Rivers, 129.

  Ploix, M., 181.

  Pösche, T., 147.

  Potocki, 167.

  Pruner Bey, 118.


  Quatrefages, A. de, 95, 143, 172, 177, 191, 239, 282.

  Quedlinfeldt, 118.


  Radde, Dr., 30.

  Ratzel, F., 233, 239, 296.

  Rawlinson, 118, 126.

  Reclus, E., 44, 243.

  Reiss, W., 129.

  Ribbe, F. C., 22.

  Riccardi, P., 35.

  Ritter, 116.

  Rittich, A. F., 171, 208, 214, 215.

  Roskof, G., 67.

  Rousselet, L., 168.


  St. Vincent, B. de, 122.

  Sayce, A. H., 115, 126, 147.

  Schliemann, H., 160.

  Schmidt, E., 22.

  Schneider, W., 53, 55, 67.

  Schrader, O., 147, 162.

  Schweinfurth, K., 179.

  Scylax, 117.

  Seeland, N., 211.

  Spencer, H., 56, 67.

  Steinen, K. von den., 268, 270.

  Stone, J. H., 116.

  Strabo, 117.

  Suess, E., 88, 89, 222.


  Tautain, L., 184, 193.

  Taylor, I., 110, 112, 143, 146, 149, 159, 162.

  Ten Kate, Dr., 256.

  Testut, L., 33.

  Thompson, A., 235.

  Tiele, C. P., 42.

  Topinard, P., 31, 36.

  Tubino, Dr., 144.


  Verneau, Dr., 116.

  Virchow, R., 27, 31, 80, 109, 128, 129, 145, 148, 163, 172, 229.


  Wagner, M., 20, 44, 221.

  Waitz, Th., 20, 40, 186, 286.

  Wake, C. S., 239.

  Wallace, A. R., 89, 196, 227.

  Wharton, 151.

  Whitman, W., 177.

  Whitney, W. D., 162.

  Wilson, D., 75.

  Winkler, H., 144, 212, 215.

  Woldrich, J. N., 84.


  Zampa, R., 159.

  Zeisberger, D., 290.

  Zittel, C., 90.



INDEX OF SUBJECTS.


  Abyssinians, 135.

  Acclimation, 278.

  Adals, 131.

  Aetas, 35, 224.

  Afars, 131.

  Affection, 55.

  Africa, derivation, 122.

  Agaonas, 131.

  Agathyrsi, 166.

  Agriculture, 72.

  Ainos, 33, 216.

  Afghans, 168.

  Akka, 178, 179.

  Albanians, 152, 158.

  Albinism, 45.

  Aleutians, 216, 250.

  Alfurese, 233, 234.

  Alemanni, 163.

  Algonkins, 252.

  Allophyllic stocks, 114.

  Amalgamation, 283.

  Amhara, 135.

  American Indians, 71, 247, 293.

  American religions, 71.

  American race, 247, 281, 293.

  Amorites, 126.

  Amoshagh, 122.

  Ancestral worship, 56, 68.

  Andaman islands, 224.

  Angles, 163.

  Anglo-American, 164.

  Animals, domestic, 72.

  Animism, 68.

  Annamese, 206.

  Apaches, 251.

  Apes, extinct, 84.

  Aquitanians, 143.

  Arabia Felix, 134.

  Arabians, 125, 133.

  Arameans, 137.

  Araucarians, 275.

  Arawaks, 268.

  Architecture, 72.

  Areas of characterization, 94.

  Armenians, 167.

  Armorican, 154.

  Arms, length of, 28.

  Arnauts, 158.

  Arrow releases, 34.

  Aryac stock, 144.

  Aryac migration, 153.

  Aryans, origin of, 144.

  Aryo-Semitic stock, 150, 299.

  Ashanti, 185.

  Asia, 89.

  Asian race, the, 195, 281.

  Assyrians, 126, 130, 150.

  Athapascans, 251.

  Atlas mountains, 89, 112.

  Attila, 210.

  Austafrica, 89.

  Austafrican race, 98, 173, 296.

  Australians, 33, 35, 43, 46, 53, 55, 239, 240.

  Auvergnats, 107.

  Avars, 171, 210.

  Avesta, the, 145, 167.

  Aymaras, 272.

  Aztecs, 259.


  Baber, 209.

  Bactrians, 167.

  Bambaras, 184.

  Baniuns, 183.

  Bantu group, 189.

  Barabras, 187.

  Barbari, 121.

  Baris, 181.

  Basques, 107, 111, 112, 142, 143.

  Battaks, 233, 234.

  Batuas, 178.

  Bedawins, 133.

  Bechuanas, 189, 192.

  Bedjas, 131.

  Berbers, 112, 116, 118, 121, 157, 183.

  Beluchis, 168.

  Bertas, 187.

  Bhillas, 244.

  Bhotan, 205.

  Biddumas, 182.

  Bilins, 131.

  Birmans, 205.

  Birthplace of species, 82.

  Black Caribs, 285.

  Blondes, 147, 163.

  Boadicea, 107.

  Bohemians, 165.

  Boru Island, 236.

  Brahmans, 153, 169.

  Brahmanism, 170.

  Brahui, 243.

  Brains, size of, 26.

  Brebres, 121.

  Bretons, 107, 155.

  Briges, 167.

  Bretons, 107.

  Bronze, Asian, 145.

  Brunettes, 147, 163.

  Buddhism, 69, 70, 170, 201.

  Bugis, 233.

  Bulgarians, 165, 210.

  Burgundians, 163.

  Bushmen, 177, 179, 214.


  Caddoes, 255.

  Caffres, 189.

  Cafusos, 33, 284.

  Caledonians, 107.

  Calf of leg, 33.

  Cambodia, 170.

  Cambodians, 206.

  Canaanites, 126.

  Canarese, 244.

  Canon of proportion, 36.

  Cantabrians, 121, 143.

  Carians, 159.

  Caribs, 268, 285.

  Carthaginians, 120, 125, 130.

  Caste, 170.

  Caucasic stock, 170.

  “Caucasian” race, 172.

  Caucasus, 105, 112.

  Celt-Indic stock, 144.

  Celtic peoples, 154.

  Celtic type, 107.

  Celts, 107, 111, 150, 151.

  Celtiberians, 121.

  Ceylon, 222.

  Chaco, the, 271.

  Chaldeans, 137, 199.

  Changallas, 181.

  Chata-Muskokis, 254.

  Chepewyans, 251.

  Chibchas, 271.

  Chilluks, 181.

  Chinese, the, 198.

  Chinos, 285.

  Chiriqui, 267.

  Chukchis, 214, 215.

  Circassians, 171.

  Civilization, 101, 288.

  Climate, 40.

  Cochin-China, 205.

  Color in race, 29.

  Color of skin, 30.

  Color of eyes, 32.

  Color sense, 36.

  Comanches, 257.

  Commerce, pre-historic, 75.

  Communal marriage, 53.

  Confucius, 202.

  Congo, the, 177, 178, 189, 190.

  Coptic, 120, 127, 150.

  Cossacks, 210.

  Craniology, 19.

  Creeks, 255.

  Criteria of superiority, 47.

  Croatians, 165.

  Culture defined, 101.

  Cuneiform writing, 126.

  Cyclopean walls, 160.

  Cymri, 108, 112.

  Cymric, 107, 155.

  Cypriotes, 130.

  Cyprus, 159.

  Czechs, 165.


  Dacians, 158, 166.

  Daghestan, 171.

  Dahomey, 185.

  Dakotas, 254.

  Dalmatians, 165.

  Danakils, 131.

  Danes, 163.

  Dayaks, 233, 234.

  Deluge myth, 114, 144.

  Destiny of Races, 292.

  Dinkas, 181.

  Disease in races, 39.

  Djats, 169.

  Djurjura, 111, 119.

  Dravidians, 169, 239, 243, 284.

  Dryopithecus, the, 84.


  Easter Island, 236, 238.

  Egypt, stone age, 129.

  Egyptians, 42, 120, 121, 123, 127.

  Ehkilis, 133, 134.

  Eranic peoples, 166.

  Eskimos, 21, 54, 215, 249.

  Esthonians, 212.

  Ethical standards, 58.

  Ethics, primitive, 59.

  Ethiopia, 177.

  Ethiopians, 135.

  Ethnic psychology, 52.

  Ethnographic scheme, 99.

  Etruscans, 124, 130, 155, 156.

  Eurafrica, 89.

  Eurafrican Race, 97, 103, 298.

  Eurasia, 89, 196.

  Eurasians, 107, 112.

  Euskaric stock, 142.

  Euskaric type, 159.

  Evolution, 80, 81.

  Exogamy, 43, 46.

  Eyes, orbits of, 23; color, 31.


  Facial angle, 24.

  Fans, 188.

  Fanti, 185.

  Fellahs, 188.

  Fellata, 183.

  Fetichism, 68.

  Fine arts, 73.

  Finnic group, 211.

  Finns, 212.

  Finno-Ugric, 206.

  Flatheads, 23.

  Folk-lore, 82.

  Food, 40.

  Formosa, 224.

  Franks, 163.

  French, 156.

  Friendship, 55.

  Fuegians, 53, 271.

  Fundjas, 187.


  Gaelic, 154.

  Gando, 183.

  Gallas, 131.

  Gauls, 107.

  Geez, 135.

  Genghis Khan, 209.

  Gens, 56, 57.

  Geographical provinces, 95.

  Georgians, 171.

  Germany, 157.

  Germans, 163.

  Getulians, 116.

  Ghadames, 116.

  Ghanata, 176.

  Ghiliaks, 215.

  Glacial age, 91.

  Gondwana, 222.

  Goths, 112, 125, 163.

  Great Mogul, 209.

  Greek language, 160.

  Greeks, 45.

  Gaunches, 116, 117, 122, 130.

  Guinea, 184.

  Gypsies, 169.


  Hadramaut, 134, 136.

  Haidahs, 257.

  Hair, the, 32.

  Hamitic stock, 115.

  Harrari, 135.

  Haussas, 182.

  Heart line, 29.

  Hebrews, 139.

  Heel, in negroes, 28.

  Hellenic peoples, 159.

  Heterogenesis, 81.

  Himyarites, 133, 186.

  Hindoos, 169.

  Hittites, 126, 214.

  Hottentots, 35, 177, 179.

  Hovas, 233.

  Huns, 210.

  Hunzas, 169.


  Iarbas, 122.

  Iberi, 121, 122, 143.

  Iberian peninsula, 121, 157.

  Illyrians, 152, 158.

  Illyric peoples, 158.

  Inca bone, 23.

  “Indians,” 247.

  Indo-Chinese, 205.

  Indo-Eranic peoples, 166.

  Innuit, 249.

  Irish, 107, 154.

  Iroquois, 254.

  Ishmaelites, 133.

  Islam, 69, 70, 203.

  Israelites, 137.

  Italians, 156.

  Italic peoples, 155.


  Jakout, 210.

  Jalin, 136.

  Japyges, 158.

  Japanese, 216.

  Japetus, 105.

  Javanese, 234.

  Jaws, shape of, 24.

  Jews, 139, 299.

  Joktanides, 136.


  Kabyles, 111, 116, 117, 118, 128.

  Kanembus, 182.

  Kanoris, 182.

  Kavi, 234.

  Kalihari desert, 179.

  Kalmucks, 208.

  Kamschatkans, 215.

  Karelians, 212.

  Khamers, 131.

  Khmers, 206.

  Khonds, 244.

  Kiks, 181.

  Kimos, 179.

  Kioways, 256.

  Kirghis, 211.

  Kists, 171.

  Kohls, 244.

  Koraks, 215.

  Koreans, 218.

  Kurdistan, 167.

  Kurgans, 165.


  Ladakis, 205.

  Ladinish, 156.

  Ladins, 107.

  Lamuts, 208.

  Language, 60-66.

  Languages, scheme of, 64.

  Laos, 206.

  Lao-tse, 202.

  Latin peoples, 156.

  Latins, 152, 155.

  Lapps, 35, 212.

  Leleges, 159.

  Lemuria, 223.

  Lemurian reversion, 271.

  Lesghians, 171.

  Lettic peoples, 162.

  Letto-Slavs, 152.

  Leucæthiopes, 116.

  Lhasa, 204.

  Libyan group, 115.

  Libyans, 116, 117.

  Libyo-Teutonic type, 106, 118.

  Ligurians, 150, 155.

  Linguistic stocks, 61.

  Lipans, 251.

  Lithuanian language, 149, 162.

  Livoanians, 212.

  Loan words, 65.

  Lolo, 198.

  Lombards, 163.

  Loochoo Islands, 218.

  Love words, 54.

  Luristan, 167.


  Macassars, 234.

  Macedonians, 158.

  Madagascar, 179, 222.

  Magna Grecia, 161.

  Magyars, 212.

  Malayalas, 244.

  Malays, 230, 232, 239.

  Mallinki, 184.

  Manchus, 207.

  Mandingoes, 183, 184, 193.

  Mangues, 266.

  Mantras, 224.

  Manx, 107, 154.

  Maoris, 236.

  Marghis, 182.

  Masiti, 190.

  Massagetes, 164.

  Mauritanians, 116.

  Mayas, 263.

  Mazimbas, 189.

  Megalithic structure, 120.

  Melanesians, 227, 228.

  Melanism, 45.

  Melle, 176, 193.

  Menephtah inscription, 123.

  Metissage, 45, 47.

  Miaotse, 198.

  Micronesians, 245.

  Migrations, early, 74.

  Mincopies, 224.

  Mingling of races, 45.

  Mingrelians, 171.

  Mixtecs, 262.

  Modesty, 59.

  Mohammedanism, 70.

  Monbuttus, 187.

  Monogenism, 79.

  Montenegrins, 165.

  Mois, 224.

  “Mound Builders,” 255.

  Mundas, 244.

  Muscular habits, 33.

  Mzabites, 116, 133.


  Nabotheans, 133.

  Namollos, 215.

  Nasal index, 23.

  Navajos, 251.

  Negrillos, 177.

  Negritos, 223.

  Negroes, the, 181.

  Negroids, the, 185.

  Negus, the Grand, 137.

  Nepalese, 205.

  Niger, the, 175, 176, 182.

  Nile, the, 175, 185.

  Nile, valley, 91, 129.

  Ninevites, 126.

  Norsemen, 163.

  Nose, shape of, 24.

  Nubians, 45.

  Nubus, 187.

  Nuers, 181.

  Numidians, 116.

  Nyam-Nyams, 187.


  Oases, 176.

  Obongos, 178.

  Old Prussian, 162.

  Orbital index, 23.

  Oscans, 151, 155.

  Osmanlis, 210.

  Ossetes, 167.


  Palæolithic implement, 84, 90.

  Pali, 169.

  Pamir plateau, 195, 198, 210.

  Papuas, 227, 229.

  Parsees, 112, 167.

  Pawnees, 256.

  Pelasgians, 214.

  Pelvic index, 28.

  Permians, 212.

  Personal loyalty, 56.

  Persians, 167.

  Phenicians, 126, 138, 160.

  Phonetic laws, 64.

  Phratries, 57.

  Phrygians, 159.

  Physical ideal, 41.

  Picts, 114, 143.

  Po, plain of, 111.

  Poles, 165.

  Polyandry, 53.

  Polygenism, 79.

  Polynesians, 235.

  Portuguese, 156, 157.

  Prakrit, 169.

  Proto-Aryac language, 148.

  Proto-Hellenes, 160.

  Proto-Semitic languages, 119.

  Puls, 188.

  Punt, the land, 176.

  Pygmies, 177.


  Qquichuas, 272.

  Quaternary, geography, 86.

  Quimos, 179.


  Races, development, 92.

  Races, classification, 97.

  Races, subdivisions, 98.

  Rajpoots, 169.

  Rapanui, 238.

  Red hair, 45.

  Religion, 67.

  Rifians, 116, 125.

  Rig Veda, 169.

  River drift men, 84, 91.

  Romance languages, 156.

  Romany, 169.

  Roumanians, 156, 157.

  Russians, 165.

  Ruthenians, 165.


  Sabeans, 133.

  Sahaptins, 258.

  Sahara, the, 87, 88, 116, 173, 176.

  Sakaies, 224.

  Sakulavas, 189.

  Sakya Muni, 69.

  Samaritans, 137.

  Sambaquis, 269.

  Samnites, 155.

  Samoyeds, 212.

  Sandehs, 187.

  Sansandig, 183.

  Sanscrit, 145, 160, 168.

  Santals, 244.

  Sarmatians, 164.

  Savai, 236.

  Saxons, 163.

  Scotch, the, 154.

  Scythians, 164.

  Senegal, 183, 184.

  Semangs, 224.

  Semites, cradle of, 132.

  Sereres, 183.

  Serkus, 116.

  Servians, 165.

  Sex relations, 37.

  Sexual impulse, 53.

  Sexual preference, 43.

  Shamanism, 68.

  Sheba, Queen of, 133.

  Shilhas, 116.

  Shintoism, 217.

  Shoshonees, 256.

  Siagosch, 112.

  Siamese, 206.

  Sibiric Branch, 206.

  Sicily, 161.

  Simiadæ in Europe, 85.

  Sinhalese, 235.

  Sinitic Branch, 197.

  Skulls, shape of, 21.

  Skypetars, 158.

  Slavonic peoples, 164.

  Sokoto, 183.

  Somalis, 132.

  Sononki, 184.

  Spaniards, 156.

  Spanish Americans, 45.

  Special senses, 36.

  Steatopygy, 35.

  Stone age, 91.

  Stone age in Egypt, 129.

  Suahelis, 189.

  Sudan, the, 181, 182.

  Suevi, 112.

  Suomi, 212.

  Susians, 224.

  Sutures of skull, 22.

  Swedes, 163.

  Syrians, 126, 137, 161.

  Sygyni, 166.


  Taboo, 237.

  Tadchiks, 168.

  Tagalas, 232, 233.

  Tamerlane, 209.

  Tamils, 244.

  Tanganyika Lake, 190.

  Tapuyas, 270.

  Tarascos, 262.

  Tartar or Tatar, 209.

  Tasmanians, 240.

  Tavastes, 212.

  Tchad, Lake, 175, 182.

  Teeth, the, 26.

  Telugus, 244.

  Teutonic peoples, 163.

  Thai, 206.

  Thibetans, 204.

  Thracians, 158, 167.

  Tibbus, 116, 183.

  Tibia, shape of, 28.

  Tigres, 135.

  Timbuctoo, 183.

  Tinneh, 251.

  Tlinkit, 257.

  Tonkinese, 206.

  Todas, 183, 244.

  Tonga, 236.

  Totem, the, 56.

  Touaregs, 122.

  Transylvania, 166.

  Tribal religions, 69.

  Tuariks, 116, 125.

  Tungus, 207.

  Tunisia, 90, 119, 120.

  Tupis, 269.

  “Turanian,” 213.

  Turcomans, 210.

  Turks, 161, 209, 210.

  Types of white race, 106.


  Ugrians, 212.

  Umbrians, 151, 156.

  Ural-Altaic, 206.

  Utes, 43.


  Vandals, 112, 125, 163.

  Vans, 114, 153.

  Veddahs, 230, 235.

  Volapük, 67.

  Volscians, 155.

  Vouatouas, 178.


  Waganda, 190.

  Wallachians, 156.

  Walloons, 107.

  War, 76-78.

  Watuta, 190.

  Welsh, 107, 154.

  Wends, 165.

  White Nile, 176, 181, 182.

  Wolofs, 183, 184.

  Woman, 38, 58.

  World religions, 69.


  Zambesi river, 189.

  Zapotecs, 262.

  Zend, 145, 167.

  Zulus, 189.

  Zuñis, 258.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The cranial indices on one of these islands varied from 70 to 83.
The excessive claims of craniometry have been severely but justly
rebuked by Moriz Wagner, in his thoughtful work, _Die Entstehung der
Arten durch räumliche Sonderung_, s. 528, sq. (Basel, 1889), and more
forcibly censured by Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, Bd. I.,
ss. 84-88. The French school of anthropologists have been especially
one-sided in their devotion to this one element of the science. Among
other great naturalists, Charles Darwin was careful to point out the
variability of the skull as an anatomical part. (_The Descent of Man_,
p. 26.)

[2] Darwin, _The Descent of Man_, p. 56. The anatomical cause of
elongated or short skulls is the earlier union of either the transverse
or longitudinal sutures, thus forcing the growth to be in the other
direction. (L. Holden, _Human Osteology_, p. 127). Of course, this
begins in fœtal life; and Pruner Bey had observed children with
different forms of the skull born of the same mother. (Oscar Peschel,
_Völkerkunde_, s. 80).

[3] See Dr. Emil Schmidt, _Anthropologische Methoden_, s. 221. This is
a valuable handbook for the student of anthropology.

[4] An interesting study of this subject has been made by Dr. F. C.
Ribbe, _L’Ordre d’Obliteration des Sutures du Crane dans les Races
Humaines_ (Paris, 1885).

[5] For a careful paper on this point see Dr. Washington Matthews, in
the _American Anthropologist_, Oct., 1889.

[6] Instead of these terms the Germans use:

  _Chamaekonch_ = orbital index below 80
  _Mesokonch_ =      “      “   80-85.
  _Hypsikonch_ =     “      “   above 85.

The French expressions are preferable.

[7] W. H. Flower, in _Journal of the Anthropological Institute_, Vol.
XIV., p. 183.

[8] The “Lemurian reversion” in human dentition brought forward some
years ago as a racial indication by Professor E. D. Cope has been
largely negatived by the later researches of Dr. Harrison Allen.
_See Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society_, 1890; also,
Virchow, _Verhandlungen der Berliner Anthrop. Gesellschaft_, 1886, s.
400, sq.

[9] L. Holden, _Human Osteology_, pp. 188, 189.

[10] More accurately, the pigment cells in man are in the deeper
layer of the _rete mucosum Malpighii_. Cf. A. Kölliker, “Ueber die
Entstehung des Pigments in den Oberhautgebilden,” in the _Zeitschrift
für wissensch. Zoölogie_, Bd. XLV., s. 713 sq.

[11] This was the result of numerous autopsies during the American
civil war. Some dissections reported by M. T. Chudzinski seem to show
that the liver of the negro is smaller than that of the white. (_Revue
d’Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 275). But its relative size to the lungs is
the question at issue. The comparative splanchnology of the different
races has yet to be worked out.

[12] Dr. John Beddoe in England, Topinard in France, and Virchow in
Germany, have been especially active in obtaining these statistics.

[13] L. Testut, in _L’Homme_, 1884, p. 377.

[14] In _Archivio per l’Antropologia_, 1885.

[15] See Topinard, “Le Canon des Proportions du Corps de l’Homme
Européen,” in _Revue d’Anthropologie_, 1889, p. 392.

[16] An instructive article on this subject is that of Alphonse de
Candolle, “Les Types brun et blond au point de vue de la Santé,” in the
_Revue d’Anthropologie_, May, 1887.

[17] A number of striking instances have been collected by Waitz,
_Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, Bd. I., s. 141. Dr. Max Bartels, in
the _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1888, s. 183, establishes this rule:
“The higher the race, the less the tolerance of surgical disease; and
in the same race, the lower the culture, the greater the tolerance.”

[18] _Solomon’s Song_, Chap. VII., v. 4, etc.

[19] See “The Wooing of Emer,” translated by Kuno Meyer, in _The
Archæological Journal_, Vol. I., p. 68 sq.

[20] C. P. Tiele, _History of the Egyptian Religion_, pp. 93, 95, etc.

[21] The most valuable study upon it is that by the late Moriz Wagner,
printed in his volume _Die Entstehung der Arten durch räumliche
Sonderung_ (Basel, 1889).

[22] Some excellent remarks on this subject are offered by Elie
Reclus, in his discussion of marriage among the Australians, in _Revue
d’Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 20, sq.

[23] On the interesting questions of the recurrence of red hair and
albinos in various races, consult Richard Andree, _Ethnographische
Parallelen und Vergleiche_, ss. 238, 261. (Neue Folge, Leipzig, 1889).

[24] The alleged examples are satisfactorily set aside by Dr. Wilhelm
Schneider, _Die Naturvölker_, Bd. II., ss. 425, sqq. (Paderborn, 1886.)

[25] Much of this seeming violence is “ceremonial,” as I have already
observed (page 44); but what I wish now to emphasize is that the
marriage is without show of affection.

[26] D. G. Brinton, “The Conception of Love in some American
Languages,” in _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 410, sq. (Philadelphia,
1890.)

[27] For numerous examples, see Dr. Wilhelm Schneider’s work, _Die
Naturvölker_, Th. II., ss. 290, 294, etc.

[28] Our countryman, Lewis H. Morgan, was the first to place this
subject in its true light in his work _Ancient Society_ (New York,
1878). He doubtless carried the theory too far in certain directions,
but in others it has not yet been sufficiently appreciated by
historians.

[29] See M. Kulischer, “Der Dualismus der Ethik bei den primitiven
Völkern,” in _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1885, s. 105.

[30] See “The Earliest Form of Human Speech as revealed by American
Tongues,” in my _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 390. (Philadelphia,
1890).

[31] “On the Origin of Language,” in _Proceedings of the Amer. Assoc.
for the Adv. of Science_, 1887, p. 279.

[32] The proof of this is furnished by Gustav Roskof, _Das
Religionswesen der Rohesten Naturvölker_ (Leipzig, 1880), and Wilhelm
Schneider, _Die Naturvölker_, II. Theil (Paderborn, 1886). The
assertions to the contrary by Herbert Spencer, Sir John Lubbock, and
various French writers, arise from a lack of study of the evidence, or
a misunderstanding of terms.

[33] I have endeavored to show this, so far as it applies to native
American religions, in my volume, _American Hero-Myths_ (Philadelphia,
1882).

[34] See my Essay, _The Cradle of the Semites_ (Philadelphia, 1890),
and Sir Daniel Wilson, “Trade and Commerce in the Stone Age,” in
_Trans. Royal Soc. Canada_, 1889.

[35] This is shown not only by the presence of artefacts and shells
from the Pacific in old graves on the Atlantic coast, but by the
well-preserved traditions of the Eastern tribes. See my _Essays of an
Americanist_, p. 188 (Philadelphia, 1890).

[36] Such at any rate is the opinion expressed last year (1889)
by the most celebrated living anthropologic anatomist, Professor
Virchow, in an address before the German Anthropological Association.
(_Correspondenz Blatt der Deutschen Anthrop. Gesell._, Sept., 1889, s.
96.) Except for the weight of his great name, I should hesitate to say
as much; and as it is, I entertain some doubts as to the accuracy of
the statement.

[37] This is the result of the most recent researches. See Prof. J.
N. Woldrich’s paper, “Ueber die palaeolithische Zeit Mittel-Europas,”
in the _Correspondenz-Blatt der Deutschen Gesell. für Anthropologie_,
1889, p. 110, sq. Also _Verhand. der Berliner Anthrop. Gesell._, 1884,
s. 530, for the absence of the old stone age in Siberia, a fact which
also tells heavily against the first peopling of America from that
region.

[38] G. de Mortillet, _Le Préhistorique Antiquité de l’Homme_, p. 120.
(Paris, 1883.) A. Gaudry, _Le Dryopithèque_ (Paris, 1890).

[39] Darwin, _The Descent of Man_, p. 155. (New York, 1883).

[40] For the details of these features, see the work of E. Suess, _Das
Antlitz der Erde_, Bd. I., s. 371, 768, etc. (Leipzig, 1885.)

[41] On the recent connection of North Africa with Europe, see A. R.
Wallace, _The Geographical Distribution of Animals_, Vol. I., pp. 38,
39; De Mortillet, _Le Prehistorique Antiquité de l’Homme_, p. 225.
“Even in post-tertiary times,” writes Huxley (_Physiography_, p. 308),
“Africa was united to Europe at the Straits of Gibraltar and across
by Malta and Sicily. The Sahara is an old sea bottom, which was below
water at a comparatively recent period.” “The Atlas mountains,” remarks
Suess, “belong to the intricate orographic system of Europe.” (_Das
Antlitz der Erde_, Bd. I., s. 462.)

[42] Emile Cartailhac _Les Ages Préhistoriques de l’Espagne et du
Portugal_, pp. 24-30 (Paris, 1886).

[43] Comp. Dr. Bleicher and Sir John Lubbock in the _Journal of the
Anthropological Institute_, Vol. X., p. 318; Dr. R. Collignon in
_Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris_, 1886, p. 676, sq.

[44] See the article of C. Zittel, “Sur les silex taillés trouvës
dans le desert Libyque,” in _Congrès Internat. d’Anthropologie et
d’Archéologie_, 1874, pp. 78, etc.

[45] See W. D. Gooch, “The Stone Age of South Africa,” in _Journal of
the Anthropological Institute_, 1881, p. 173, sq., and various later
reports and discussions in the same periodical.

[46] This opinion was long ago expressed by the distinguished
geologist, d’ Omalius d’ Halloy: “Tout nous porte á croire que les
differences que presente le genre humain remontent á un ordre de choses
antérieur á l’état actuel du globe terrestre.” _Des Races Humaines_,
p. 11 (Paris, 1845). This is also the result of recent studies. See
Prof. Edward S. Morse, on “Man in the Tertiaries,” in the _American
Naturalist_, 1884, p. 1010.

[47] _Lectures on Physical Geography_, p. 273. (London, 1880.)

[48] See A. Bastian, _Zur Lehre von den Geographischen Provinzen_
(Berlin, 1886); A. De Quatrefages, _Histoire Generale des Races
Humaines_, p. 333, (Paris, 1889); Dr. Thomas Achelis, _Die Entwickelung
der Modernen Ethnologie_, s. 65, (Berlin, 1889). Agassiz was the first
to announce (in 1850) that the different races of man are distributed
over the world in the same zoölogical provinces as those inhabited by
distinct species and genera of mammals. This fact is coming more and
more to be the accepted axiom for the study of racial development.
(Compare Darwin, _Descent of Man_, p. 169).

[49] This calculation includes in Asia the Arabian peninsula, Syria,
the Iranic regions, most of Asia Minor and the Caucasus; but excludes
Hindostan, the occupation of which by the Aryans is within the historic
period. In Africa it embraces the tract from the Atlantic to the Red
Sea, and from the Mediterranean to the Sudan, nearly all of which was
held by the Hamitic peoples when we first learn about it. In Europe it
includes the whole continent south of a line drawn from the mouth of
the Volga, through St. Petersburg to the Atlantic.

[50] One of the leading European students of anatomical racial type is
Dr. J. Kollmann, of Basle. He claims that there are four fundamental
skull types in that continent:

  1. Narrow faced, brachycephalic.
  2. Narrow faced, dolichocephalic.
  3. Broad faced, brachycephalic.
  4. Broad faced, dolichocephalic.

These forms he believes have been steadily perpetuated and have
undergone no change, except by intermarrying; they bear no relation to
intellectual ability, and they recur in nations of the same language,
customs and history. “Ethnic unity in Europe rests not upon racial
identity, but racial (anatomical) diversity.” _Verhand. der Berliner
Anthrop. Gesell._, 1889, s. 332.

[51] A more appropriate view was taken by Canon Isaac Taylor at the
meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in
1889. He defended the thesis that the human race originated in Europe
and bifurcated into the Asian and African branches. (See _Nature_,
1889, No. 40, p. 632.)

[52] For a recent summary of the evidence on this point consult Isaac
Taylor, _Origin of the Aryans_, p. 129, sq. (London, 1890.)

[53] See Freidrich Müller, _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Bd.
III., s. 224-5; Sayce, _Science of Language_, Vol. II., page 178. The
latter uses the expression that between the old Egyptian, the Libyan,
and the Semitic tongues “the grammatical agreement is most striking.”

[54] On the Guanches, consult the various works of Sabin Berthelot,
Dr. Verneau, and later J. Harris Stone in _Proceedings of the British
Association for the Advancement of Science_, 1888, p. 851. The
last-mentioned dwells on the many similarities of their arts to those
of the Egyptians.

[55] Barth is of opinion that the Berbers conquered the Sahara, not
from blacks, but “from the sub-Libyan race, the Leucæthiopes of the
ancients, with whom they intermarried” (_Travels in Africa_, Vol. I.,
340). This is, I think, the correct opinion, and not that the Sahara
was occupied by the negroes.

[56] Ritter, _Erdkunde_, Bd. I., s. 561.

[57] Walter B. Harris, in _Proceedings of the Royal Geographical
Society_, 1889, p. 490.

[58] For numerous authorities, see Sabin Berthelot, _Bulletin de
la Société d’ Ethnologie_, 1845, p. 121, sq., and his _Antiquités
Canariennes_ (Paris, 1879).

[59] The early Greek geographer known as Scylax, also speaks of the
Libyan men as blondes, and very handsome. For a recent and able
discussion of this subject, consult F. Borsari, _Geografica Ethnologica
e Storica della Tripolitana_, p. 23, sq. (Naples, 1888). The French
writers Broca, Faidherbe, etc., have also written copiously on the
Libyan blondes.

[60] The _Tahennu_. Rawlinson, _History of Ancient Egypt_, Vol. II. p.
292.

[61] As distinguished from the Arab, Pruner Bey described the Kabyle as
“of higher stature, cerebral and facial cranium broader, forehead more
vertical, eyebrows less arched, jaws more orthognathic.” My own studies
in Algeria lead me to recognize the correctness of these distinctions.
Dr. R. Collignon describes what he thinks is the most ancient Tunisian
type as tall, dolichocephalic (73), mesorrhinic (75), narrow face,
forehead and chin retreating. He says of the blonde element in Tunisia
that it is “assez rare, mais un peu partout.” _Bull. de la Soc. d’
Anthropologie de Paris_, 1886, pp. 620, 621.

[62] _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1888, s. 115.

[63] Yet Barth mentions that in the western Sahara one of the most
powerful of the Berber tribes was called _Aurághen_, the yellow, or the
gold-colored. _Travels in Africa_, vol. i, pp. 230, 339.

[64] See Broca, “Sur les blondes, et les monuments megalithiques de
l’Afrique du Nord,” in _Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1876; and Faidherbe,
_Collection Compléte d’ Inscriptions Numidiques_, Introduction. (Paris,
1870.)

[65] In offering this new derivation of the much discussed name
Berberi or Barbari, one must remember that it has always been the name
of a powerful tribe in Morocco, the Brebres; that it was what the
ancient Egyptians called them (Herodotus); and that it is to-day a
pure Libyan word. _Iberru_, is from the verbal root _ibra_, they are
free; _ibarbar_, they come forth (Newman, _Libyan Vocabulary_, pp.
40, 133). The plural in the Hamitic group was originally formed by
repetition (F. Müller, _Sprachwissenschaft_, Bd. III., s. 240). Hence
Berberi may mean either “those who came forth,” _i. e._, emigrants,
or those who go where they list, _i. e._, freemen. This is also the
meaning of _amóshagh_, the generic name of the Touaregs (Barth,
_Travels in Africa_, vol. v., page 555). Barth, a high authority,
believes that the same word _ber_ is the radical of the names Bernu,
Berdoa, Berauni, etc. The legendary ancestors of the Moroccan Berbers
(Brebres) was Ber, in which, says Barth, “we recognize the name Afer,”
the _f_ and _b_ being interchangeable in these dialects. From “Afer”
we have “Africa” (_Travels_, vol. i., p. 224). One of the principal
gods of ancient Libya and of the Guanches was Abŏra, or Ibru. See my
article “On Etruscan and Libyan Names” in _Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society_, Feb., 1890. One of the Pindaric fragments
recites a Libyan tradition to the effect that the first man, Iarbas,
sprang from the sun-heated soil, and chose for food the sweet acorns of
the tree (Lenormant, _The Beginnings of History_, p. 48). In “Iarbas”
we can scarcely fail in recognizing the same root _bar_, the change
being by the familiar process of reversal.

[66] Early in this century, Bory de St. Vincent maintained the identity
of the Iberians and Berbers (_Essai Geologique_, Paris, 1805). Humboldt
argued that there was but one language in old Spain beside the Celtic,
in spite of the direct assertion of Strabo to the contrary, and the
well-known fact that many Celtiberic inscriptions cannot be read either
in Celtic or Basque (_Prüfung der Untersuchungen_, etc., § 39).

The Roman geographer, Rufus Festus Avienus, offers the important
correction that the Iberi derived their name, not from the Ebro, as is
usually stated, but from a stream close to Gibraltar on the Atlantic
side.

    “At Iberus inde manat amnis et locos
     Fœcundat undã: plurimi ex ipso ferunt
     Dictos Iberos, non ab illo flumine
     Quod inquietos Vasconas prælabitur.”
                         --_Ora Maritima._

The two names show that it was a _nomen gentile_, and that the tribe so
known extended along the southern coast.

It has been recently asserted that many north African place-names occur
in Spain (_Revista de Anthropologia_, Madrid, 1876, quoted by Fligier).

[67] The Coptic word is _Na-pa-ut_, Bunsen, _Egypt’s Place in History_,
Vol. III, p. 137.

[68] This war is recorded in the celebrated “inscription of Menephtah,”
of the XIXth dynasty. See _Records of the Past_, Vol. IV; Brugsch
Bey, _History of Egypt_, Vol. II, p. 129, and the more recent studies
of these inscriptions by Dr. Max Müller, in the _Proceedings of the
Society for Biblical Archæology_, Vol. VI.

[69] As further showing the ancient culture of the Libyans, I may note
that they constructed stone dwellings before their conquest by the
Romans. For extracts showing this, see _Revue des deux Mondes_, Dec.,
1865.

[70] The evidence to this effect I have marshalled in two papers read
before the American Philosophical Society: “On the Ethnic Affinities of
the Ancient Etruscans” (_Proceedings of the Amer. Phil. Soc._, Oct.,
1889), and “A Comparison of Etruscan and Libyan Names” (_Ibid._, Feb.,
1890).

[71] The most scholarly analysis of this curious alphabet, called the
_tifinagh_ or _tifinar_, will be found in Prof. Halevy’s _Essai d’
Epigraphie Libyque_ (Paris, 1875).

[72] See Duveyrier, _Les Touaregs du Nord_, p. 339; H. Bissuell, _Les
Touaregs de l’ Ouest_, pp. 106, 115 (Alger., 1888), etc.

[73] Hooker and Ball, _Tour in Morocco_, p. 86.

[74] To Prof. A. H. Sayce is, I think, due the honor of showing that
the pre-Semitic white race of Palestine was of the Libyan stock. See
_Nature_, 1888, p. 321. He had previously pointed out that the two
forms of tenses of the Libyan verb “correspond most remarkably with
Assyrian forms” (_Introduction to the Science of Language_, Vol. II.,
p. 180). Rawlinson, in his _Story of Phenicia_ (N. Y., 1889), adopts
the view that the early Phenicians were Hamites. The epochal discovery
of Halevy, now accepted by Delitzsch and other Assyriologists, that the
“second” column of the cuneiform inscription is merely a Hamito-Semitic
dialect in another character, finally destroys the “Turanian”
hypothesis, and restores the ancient Assyrians to the Eurafrican race.

[75] Virchow, after close studies in Egypt, expressed himself very
positively that the affinities of the old Egyptian stock were “with
the Hamites, with the Berbers and Kabyles, the peoples who from the
remotest times have inhabited the regions of the Atlas.” See his
address in the _Correspondenz-Blatt der deutschen Gesellschaft für
Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte_, 1888, p. 110.

[76] On the stone age in Egypt, see General Pitt-Rivers, in _Journal
of the Anthropological Institute_, 1881, p. 387, sq.; and especially
the exhaustive article by Dr. Virchow in _Verhandlungen der Berliner
Anthrop. Gesell._, 1888, p. 345, sq. As early as 1881 Prof. Henry
W. Haynes of Boston announced his discovery of palæolithic stone
implements in Upper Egypt. (_Mems. of the Amer. Acad. of Arts and
Sciences_, Vol. X., p. 357.) The latest contribution to the subject is
by W. Reiss, _Funde aus der Steinzeit Aegyptens_ (Berlin, 1890).

[77] M. G. de Lapouge goes quite as far. He writes (_Revue
d’Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 308), “L’Egypte s’est civilisée pendant
notre quaternaire, et son plus grand developpement a coincidé avec
notre epoque néolithique.”

[78] “Jusqu’a cette heure,” writes A. L. Delattre, in the _Bulletin
des Antiquités Africaines_, 1885, p. 242, “les pieces archéologiques
de notre collection de Carthage, qui remontent incontestablement à la
période primitive de l’histoire de cette ville fameuse, ont toutes le
cachet egyptien prononcé.”

[79] Dr. L. Faurot, in _Revue d’Ethnographie_, 1887, p. 57.

[80] See my essay on this subject, _The Cradle of the Semites_
(Philadelphia, 1890); also the able paper of G. Bertin, “On the Origin
of the Semites,” in _Journal of the Anthropological Institute_,
1882, p. 423, sq., and the speculations of R. G. Haliburton, in
_Proceedings of the British Assoc. for the Adv. of Science_, 1887, p.
907. An excellent summary of the argument that the Semites came from
Africa will be found in Gifford Palgrave’s article on Arabia in the
_Encyclopedia Britannica_.

[81] The important Berber folk of the Mzabites in Southern Algiers
are said strongly to resemble Semites, presenting “a reunion of
the secondary characteristics of the Jews and Arabs.” _Revue d’
Anthropologie_, 1886, p. 353.

[82] The late investigations of E. Glaser in Southern Arabia have
brought many hundreds of these inscriptions to our knowledge.

[83] Doughty, _Travels in Arabia Deserta_, Vol. I., p. 102. About five
per cent. of the Arabs of the Peninsula of Sinai are pure blondes. See
_Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1886, p. 351.

[84] The statistics in Central Europe show that among the Jews there,
about 15 per cent. are true blondes, 25 per cent. brunettes, and the
remainder intermediate. The blondes are generally dolichocephalic, the
brunettes brachycephalic or medium. See Dr. Fligier, “Zur Anthropologie
der Semiten,” in _Mitthiel. der Wiener Anthrop. Gesell._, Bd. IX., s.
155, sq.

[85] Compare Taylor, _Origin of the Aryans_, p. 98, and Paul Broca,
_Sur l’Origine et la Repartition de la Langue Basque_, Paris (1875).
Broca recognized the autochthony of the Basque in Spain, and considered
their language the oldest in Europe.

[86] Called by the French craniologists _tête de lièvre_. De
Quatrefages identified certain skulls from kitchen-middens in Portugal
as of this form, indicating that the Euskaric peoples once extended
that far west. _Hist. Gen. des Races Humaines_, p. 478.

[87] See on this point the detailed comparisons in Heinrich Winkler’s
_Ural-altaische Völker und Sprachen_, ss. 155-167, and elsewhere. The
attempted identifications of Basques and Berbers by Dr. Tubino (_Los
Aborigines Ibericos_, Madrid, 1876) is therefore a failure.

[88] I should prefer the term “Celtindic” to either of the others.
“Aryan,” or Aryac, suggested by Prof. Max Müller from a Sanscrit root,
signifies “noble,” “superior.” It is open to several objections, but I
have adopted it on account of its popularity.

[89] The European bronze age, for instance, was not introduced by
the Indo-Aryac peoples, as their early art-forms in bronze are
quite distinct, and their alloy different, the Asian bronze being
a zinc, the European a tin alloy. See on this R. Virchow in the
_Correspondenz-Blatt der deutchen Gesell. für Anthropologie_, 1889, s.
94.

[90] See d’Halloy’s articles in the _Bulletins de l’Academie Royale
de Belgique_, beginning with Vol. VI (1839); especially in 1848 his
“Observations sur la Distribution ancienne des peuples de la race
blanche.” Dr. Latham first stated this view in an Appendix, dated
1859, to an article on “The original extent of the Slavonic area.”
See his _Opuscula_, pp. 127-28 (London, 1860). I observe that Dr.
John Beddoe, in his last address before the Anthropological Institute
of Great Britain this year, 1890, repeats the statement: “The first
anthropologist of note who took up the notion of the European origin
of the Aryans was Dr. Robert Latham” (_Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, 1890, p.
491). On the contrary, d’Halloy, in the “Observations” above quoted
(p. 9), urges that the “Indo-Germanic” languages point to a kinship of
those who speak them, and that they always have been in Europe, and did
not come from Asia.

[91] A. De Candolle, _Revue d’Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 265, sq. This
is ingeniously explained on the mechanical theory of mixing colors by
d’Halloy. _Obs. sur la Distrib. de la Race Blanche_, p. 11. (Bruxelles,
1848.) Compare also R. Virchow, _Die Verbreitung des blonden und des
brunetten Typus in Mitteleuropa_, who attributes the increase of
brunette’s to a reversion to “Celtic or pre-Celtic ancestry.”

[92] This opinion has also been defended by Fligier, _Zur
praehistorischen Ethnologie Italiens_, p. 55.

[93] Taylor, _Origin of the Aryans_, p. 259.

[94] See his remarkable essay, published in 1821, entitled _Prüfung
der Untersuchungen über die Urbewohner Hispaniens vermittlest der
Vaskischen Sprache_, § 47.

[95] In his latest work, Dr. Abel avers that the old Egyptian
and Indo-European stocks have as many radicals in common as the
idioms of the latter have among themselves. _Ægyptisch-Europaeische
Sprachverwandtschaft_, s. 58 (Leipzig, 1890).

[96] See Karl Brugman, _Comparative Grammar of the Indo-Germanic
Languages_, Vol. I., pp. 13, 14; Wharton, _Etyma Latina_, Introduction.

[97] See Dr. Fligier, _Zur praehistorischen Ethnologie Italiens_ (Wien
1877). There is a markedly brachycephalic type among the Albanians,
quite dissimilar from the Greek. I incline to believe it is Celtic.
See Dr. Raphael Zampa, “Anthropologie Illyrienne,” in the _Revue d’
Anthropologie_, 1886, p. 625, sq.

[98] See Max Duncker, _History of Greece_, Vol. I, p. 11.

[99] _Ibid._, pp. 13, 142.

[100] Taylor, _Origin of the Aryans_, p. 98.

[101] The Phrygian was about as closely related to the Greek as Gothic
to middle High German. See Curtius, _History of Greece_, Vol. I, p. 43,
who acknowledges that the testimony of antiquity is in favor of the
easterly migration of the Hellenic peoples, but denies the fact because
it is in conflict with his Asiatic hypothesis.

[102] The Cypriote Greeks used a remarkable syllabic alphabet of great
antiquity. R. H. Lang, _Cyprus_, pp. 8, 12 (London, 1878).

[103] On this important subject see Max Duncker, _History of Greece_,
Vol. I, Chap. IV, “The Phenicians in Hellas;” and H. Schliemann,
_Tiryns_, pp. 28, 57, etc.

[104] Hovelacque et Hervé, _Precis d’Anthropologie_, p. 573.

[105] This is the opinion of Penka, Schrader, Taylor, etc.

[106] “The Lithuanian language has more antique features by far than
any other now spoken dialect of the whole great (Aryac) family.” W. D.
Whitney, _Oriental and Linguistic Studies_, Vol. II, p. 228.

[107] In North Germany the present percentage of blondes is 42; in the
German empire, 32; in Austria, 20; in Switzerland, 11. (Virchow, _Die
Verbreitung des blonden und des brunetten Typus in Mitteleuropa_.)

[108] On the extreme diversity of skull-forms among the modern Russians
see _Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1889, p. 99. The race of the “Kurgans,”
or ancient tombs, which are supposed to date back to the ninth or tenth
century, had usually long skulls; but about 20 per cent. are short.
Hervé is quite right in his statement, “Il n’y a pas un type général
slave, il n’y a même pas un type slave du nord et un type slave du
sud.” _Précis d’ Anthropologie_, p. 564.

[109] Cf. Gesa Kuun, “L’ Origine des Nationalités de la Transylvanie,”
in _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1888, pp. 232, sqq.

[110] Omalius d’Halloy has called attention to the statement of
Potocki, _Voyages_, p. 167, that the Ossetes, by their own traditions,
came from southeastern Russia, on the river Don. They are generally
blondes of the brachycephalic Slavonic type.

[111] Cf. Louis Rousselet, _Les Afghans_, in _Revue d’ Anthropologie_,
1888, p, 412.

[112] Sanscrit civilization extended throughout most of Farther India
and Malasia, and at one time had one of its chief seats in Cambodia,
where the ruins of magnificent palaces decorated with subjects from
the Ramayana attest its presence. See Abel Bergaigne, “Sur l’Histoire
Ancienne du Cambodge,” in _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1885, p. 477, sq.

[113] A. F. Rittich, _Die Ethnographie Russlands_, p. 2. (4to, Gotha,
1878.)

[114] “Everything goes to prove,” writes de Quatrefages, “that the
Caucasus was not a center of _emigration_, but of _immigration_ by
various peoples at a comparatively late date.” (_Histoire Generale des
Races Humaines_, p. 475.) The researches of Rudolph Virchow result in
showing that these mountains were peopled at about the beginning of the
age of bronze.

[115] This is the result of the observations of Ernest Chantre, who
spent years in personal investigations throughout the Caucasus.
(_Recherches Anthropologiques dans le Caucase_, quoted in _Revue d’
Anthropologie,_ 1888, p. 480.) Virchow reached the same conclusion from
his osteologic studies (_Zeitschrift fur Ethnologie_, 1887, p. 97.) It
is high time therefore to stop talking about the “Caucasian” race.

[116] For a full discussion of this subject consult de Quatrefages,
_Les Pygmées des anciens et de la science moderne_, Paris, 1886.

[117] See the very detailed observations of Emin Bey in the
_Zeitschrift fur Ethnologié_, 1886, s. 145. The hairy skin is also
mentioned by Du Chaillu.

[118] Dr. K. Schweinfurth, _The Heart of Africa_, vol. i., p. 139; and
Fritsch, _Verhandlungen der Berliner Anthrop. Gesellschaft_, 1887, s
195.

[119] Leclerc, “Les Pygmées à Madagascar,” in _Revue d’ Ethnographie_,
1887, p. 323.

[120] Theodore Hahn, in _Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1887, P. 272.

[121] See M. Ploix, “Les Hottentots et leur Religion,” in _Revue d’
Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 271, sq.

[122] Dr. L. Tautain, “Sur l’ Ethnographie du Sénégal,” in _Revue d’
Ethnographie_, 1885, p. 61, sq.

[123] See Th. Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, Bd. II, ss. 476-8.

[124] See Dr. Frederich Müller, _Die Æquatoriale Sprach-Familie in
Central Afrika_, Wien, 1889.

[125] The word _bantu_ in that language means “people” or “men.” It is
preferable to “Caffres,” which is sometimes applied to the group, and
which is an Arabic term meaning “infidels.”

[126] These traditions are briefly presented by de Quatrefages, _Hist.
Gen. des Races Humaines_, pp. 371, sqq.

[127] Grandel, _Ethnography_, p. 335.

[128] These are found in Bechuana land at Zimbabye. See John Mackenzie,
_Austral Africa_, Vol. I., p. 35 (London, 1887.)

[129] Except the Bushman and Hottentots and Negrillos, all the African
tribes seem to have long known the working of iron. See Dr. F. Delisle,
“Sur la Fabrication du fer dans l’ Afrique Equatoriale,” in the _Revue
d’ Ethnographie_, 1884, p. 465.

[130] On the geographical domain of the Mandingoes, see a careful note
by Dr. Toutain in the _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1886, p. 515.

[131] Cf. A. R. Wallace, _Geographical Distribution of Animals_.

[132] This is Mantegazza’s opinion, _Archivio per l’Antropologia_,
1888, p. 121, sq.

[133] D’Escayrac de Lauture, _Memoires sur la Chine_, Religion, p. 64
(Paris, 1877).

[134] D’Escayrac de Lauture, _Memoires sur la Chine_, Religion, pp.
18-20 (Paris, 1877).

[135] A. F. Rittich, _Die Ethnographie Russlands_, ss. 20-24.

[136] Nicholas Seeland, “Les Kirghis,” in _Revue d’Anthropologie_,
1886, p. 27.

[137] The best recent authority is Dr. Heinrich Winkler, _Uralaltaische
Völker und Sprachen_. (Berlin, 1884.)

[138] _Note on the Lapps of Finmark_, p. 8. (Paris, 1886.)

[139] A. H. Keane, _Journal of the Anthropological Institute_, Vol.
XV., p. 218.

[140] N. A. E. de Nordenskjold, in _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1884, p.
402; also A. F. Rittich, _Die Ethnographie Russland_ s. 12 (Gotha,
1878).

[141] I have followed in this obscure subject W. H. Dall, “On the
so-called Chukchi and Namollo People of Eastern Siberia” in the
_American Naturalist_, 1881, p. 857. Rittich says, erroneously, that
the Namollos are not related to the Chukchis. (_Die Ethnographie
Russland,_ s. 15.) The relationship of the Chukchi, Korak and
Kamschatkan is demonstrated by Heinrich Winkler, _Uralaltäische Völker
und Sprachen_, s. 120.

[142] J. Deniker, _Les Ghiliaks d’après les derniers Renseignements_,
pp. 5, 17. (Paris, 1884.)

[143] The date of the foundation of the Japanese ecclesiastical empire
is put at 660 B.C. D’Escayrac de Lauture, _La Chine et les Chinois_,
Vol. I, p. 17.

[144] For details, see Hovelacque et Hervé, _Precis d’ Anthropologie_,
p. 468-470.

[145] An admirable analysis of the physical traits of the Japanese will
be found in the _Journal of Speculative Philosophy_, Vol. VI., written
by Benjamin Smith Lyman, long a resident among them.

[146] This subject has been presented with great amplitude of
illustration by the late Moritz Wagner. See _Die Entstehung der Arten
durch räumliche Sonderung_, Basel, 1889.

[147] Dr. Finsch, for instance, mentions that on the little island of
Tanna, in Melanesia, nearly every village has a dialect unintelligible
to its neighbors. _Anthrop. Ergebnisse einer Reise in der Sudsee_, s.
38. (Berlin, 1884.)

[148] This lost continent is sometimes called Gondwana land, from the
recurrence of the Gondwana formation in Hindostan, Madagascar, and the
east coast of Africa. See Suess, _Das Antlitz der Erde_, Bd. ii.

[149] The word _aëta_ is Malayan, and means “black.” There is some
doubt about the Semangs, as some of them are fair. See _Journal of the
Anthropological Institute,_ 1886, p. 429, and compare F. de Castelnau
in the _Revue de philologie et d’ ethnographie_, 1876, p. 174, sq.

[150] The Susians in the lower valley of the Euphrates show in color
and hair an infusion of Negro blood, but this is attributable to the
introduction of slaves into that region from Africa. (Cf. _Revue d’
Anthropologie_, 1888, p. 79.)

[151] For an excellent study of the Andaman islanders, see E. H.
Man, in _Journal of Anthropological Institute_, Vol. XII., etc. F.
Blumentritt describes the Negritos of the Philippines with head and
features thoroughly Negro like. (_Ethnographie der Philippinen_, s. 5,
Gotha, 1882.)

[152] Dr. J. Montano, in _Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1886, p. 691; F.
Blumentritt, _Ethnographie der Philippinen_, s. 7. (Gotha, 1882.) The
description applies principally to the Negritos of these islands, where
they number about 10,000 persons.

[153] Flower, “On the Osteology and Affinities of the Natives of the
Andaman Islands,” in _Journal of the Anthropological Institute_,
1880, p. 132. The same position is taken by James Dallas, in the
_Proceedings of the British Naturalists’ Society_, 1884. He argues that
the Negritos, Papuas and African Negroes belong to one family, the
“Melanochroic,” which in view of the continuity and isolation of the
region it occupies must originally have been a unit.

[154] See A. B. Meyer, in _Mittheilungen der Wiener Anthropologischen
Gesellschaft,_ 1874; and A. R. Wallace, Australasia, pp. 452-456. The
great diversity in color, hair, etc., is commented on by Dr. O. Finsch,
_Anthropologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in der Sudsee_, p. 34. The
difference is sometimes by villages, some being quite fair and called
“white Papuas,” though of pure blood ostensibly.

[155] See Rev. L. Ella, “A Comparison of the Malayan and Papuan Races
of Polynesia,” in _Proceedings of the Australasian Association for the
Advancement of Science_, Vol. I. (1888), p. 484, sq. The author writes
from 26 years’ intercourse with the various islanders. He claims that
the Papuas “have distinctly African resemblances, habits, customs,
languages, and religions.”

[156] These singular facts are fully supported by the studies of Dr. O.
Finsch, _Anthropologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in der Sudsee_, s. 34,
sq.

[157] See Fr. Müller, _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Bd. II., Ab.
II., s. 160.

[158] Horatio Hale, _Ethnog. and Philol. of the U. S. Exploring
Exped._, p. 44.

[159] In the _Verhand. der Berliner Anthrop. Gesell._, 1889, s. 162.

[160] See Friedrich Müller, _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Bd. I.,
Ab. II., s. 30; Bd. II., Ab. II., s. 160.

[161] M. O. Beauregard has compared 120 common words and numerals in
dialects from Madagascar to Easter Island, and proves that all are
affined to the pure Malay, though with many verbal admixtures from
other sources. _Bulletin de la Société d’ Anthropologie_, 1886, pp.
520-527.

[162] “On ne peut guère mettre en doute que les vrais Malais
appartiennent au groupe des races à petite taille et à tête plus ou
moins ronde de l’Asie.” Hovelacque et Hervé, _Précis d’ Anthropologie_,
p. 470.

[163] See Friedrich Müller, _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft_, Bd.
II., Ab. II., s. 1-3.

[164] Compare Fr. Ratzel, _Völkerkunde_, Bd. II., s. 371. Dr. Hamy and
Mr. Keane have questioned the relationship of the Battaks.

[165] Dr. O. Finsch, _Anthropologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in der
Sudsee_, s. 1. (Berlin, 1884.)

[166] A. Thompson, “On the Osteology of the Veddahs,” in _Journal
of the Anthropological Institute_, 1889. “Veddah” in Sanscrit means
“hunter.”

[167] On the inhabitants of Boru, see G. W. Earl, _Native races of the
Indian Archipelago_, p. 185.

[168] Other Hypotheses about the Polynesians are that they are an
autochthonous race developed in New Zealand (Lesson et Martinet, _Les
Polynésiens_, Paris, 1884); that they came from America; that they are
of Aryac descent (Fornander).

The migrations of the Polynesians have been closely studied by Horatio
Hale, _Ethnography and Philology of the U. S. Exploring Expedition_,
pp. 116-196 (1847). Many later writers have pursued the subject.

[169] The sacred legends and rites of the Polynesians have been
collected by Bastian, _Inselgruppen in Oceanien_ (Berlin, 1883), and
other writers.

[170] Dr. O. Finsch, _Anthropologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in der
Sudsee_, s. 19.

[171] De Quatrefages found the Australian sub-type of skull reappearing
among the Dravidians, and he goes so far as to add, “The affinity of
the Australian and Dravidian languages is now universally admitted.”
_Hist. Gen. des Races Humaines_, p. 333. He quotes the authority of
Maury; but Fr. Müller thinks the analogies “too weak” to be convincing.
(_Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft._ Bd. II., s. 95-98.)

[172] Dr. Friedrich Ratzel acknowledges the probable inroads of
Malays in southern India, but condemns classing the Dravidas with the
Australians. _Völkerkunde_, Bd. III., s. 411 (Leipzig, 1888).

[173] Wake, “The Papuans and Polynesians,” in _Jour. of the Anthrop.
Institute_, Nov., 1882.

[174] This is the positive statement of Geo. W. Earl, who had seen
Tasmanians. (_Native Races of the Indian Archipelago_, p. 188. London,
1853.) It is contradicted by Dr. Hamy, in the _Crania Ethnica_, for no
other reason, apparently, than that it does not fit his theories.

[175] “The cast of the face is between the African and Malay types.” H.
Hale, _Ethnography and Philology of the U. S. Exploring Expedition_, p.
107. Mr. Hale describes their hair as “long, fine and wavy, like that
of Europeans,” the color usually a dark brown.

[176] Edwin N. Curr, _The Australian Race_, Vol. III., p. 675 (London,
1887).

[177] Elisée Reclus, “Contributions à la Sociologie des Australiens,”
in _Revue d’ Anthropologie_, 1887.

[178] For abundant authorities see A. Bastian, _Inselgruppen in
Oceanien_, ss. 121, 122 (Berlin, 1883).

[179] Cf. A. T. Packard, “Notes on the Labrador Eskimos,” in _American
Naturalist_, 1885, p. 473.

[180] E. Petitot, _Monographie des Déné Dindjié_, p. 24 (Paris, 1876).

[181] See F. Michel, _Dix huit ans chez les Sauvages_ (Paris, 1866),
and Petitot, ubi supra.

[182] See an article on “The Probable Nationality of the Mound
Builders,” in my _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 67 (Philadelphia, 1890).

[183] Dr. Ten Kate, in _Revue d’ Ethnographie_, 1885, p. 122.

[184] _Life Among the Pi-Utes_, by Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins (Boston,
1883).

[185] Dr. A. Krause, _Die Tlinkit Indianer_ (Jena, 1885).

[186] The tribes of British Columbia have been especially studied by
Dr. Franz Boas, who has published extensively upon them.

[187] See D. G. Brinton, _American Hero Myths_, Chap. III
(Philadelphia, 1882).

[188] The Tarascos have been studied with much care by Dr. Nicolas
Leon, of Michoacan, who has published a number of articles on their
antiquities and languages.

[189] S. Habel, _The Sculptures of Santa Lucia Cosumalhuapa_
(Washington, 1878). Bastian has also written a good account of them
(Berlin, 1882).

[190] D. G. Brinton, “On the Alaguilac Language of Guatemala,” in
_Proceedings of the American Philosoph. Soc._, 1887.

[191] D. G. Brinton, _The Güegüence, a comedy ballet in the Dialect of
Nicaragua_. Introduction, p. viii. (Philadelphia, 1883).

[192] C. H. Berendt, _Bull. of the Amer. Geog. Society_, 1876, p. 11.

[193] Karl von der Steinen, _Durch Central Brasilien_, s. 308.

[194] On this complex question compare _Verhandlungen der Berliner
Anthrop. Gesell._, 1886, s. 703; 1887, s. 532, and elsewhere; Karl
von den Steinen, _Durch Central Brasilien_, s. 295, and the work of
Von Martius, _Zur Ethnographie Amerika’s zumal Brasiliens_, Vol. I.
(Leipzig, 1867).

[195] The most careful analysis of the Peruvian government is given
by Dr. Gustav Brühl, _Die Culturvölker Alt-America’s_, pp. 369, sq.
(Cincinnati, 1887).

[196] Dr. J. Orgeas, _La Pathologie des Races Humaines_, p. 481 (Paris,
1886).

[197] Authorities in Hovelacque et Hervé, _Précis d’Anthropologie_,
214, sq.

[198] This is the opinion advocated by de Quatrefages. His arguments
will be found in the seventh chapter of his _Histoire Générale des
Races Humaines_ (Paris, 1889).

[199] Dr. J. Orgeas, _La Pathologie des Races Humaines_, p. 481.

[200] Darwin, _The Descent of Man_, p. 171 (New York, 1883).

[201] Dally, quoted in Hovelacque et Hervé, _Précis d’ Anthropologie_,
p. 218.

[202] See the question discussed by Waitz, _Anthropologie der
Naturvölker_, Bd. I, s. 188.

[203] Quoted in Darwin, _The Descent of Man_, p. 182.

[204] S. N. Clark, _Circular of the Bureau of Education_, Washington,
1877; Garrick Mallery, in _Proceedings of the Amer. Assoc. Adv.
Science_, 1877, p. 340.

[205] This is the statement of Dr. F. Nansen, the recent explorer of
Greenland, and many others.

[206] F. Blumentritt, _Die Ethnographie der Phillipinen_, s. 8 (Gotha,
1882).

[207] Fr. Ratzel, _Völkerkunde_, Bd. I, s. 628, who quotes the
authority of Du Chaillu.

[208] George Gerland, _Anthropologische Beiträge_, Bd. I., s. 5 (Halle,
1875).

[209] _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1887, s. 88.


[Transcriber’s Note:

Obvious printer errors corrected silently.

Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation are as in the original.]





*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Races and Peoples - Lectures on the Science of Ethnography" ***

Doctrine Publishing Corporation provides digitized public domain materials.
Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians.
This effort is time consuming and expensive, so in order to keep providing
this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties,
including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Doctrine Publishing
Corporation's ISYS search for use by individuals, and we request that you
use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort
to Doctrine Publishing's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a
large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of
public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Keep it legal -  Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for
ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because
we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States,
that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries.
Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we
can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is
allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Doctrine Publishing
ISYS search  means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world.
Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About ISYS® Search Software
Established in 1988, ISYS Search Software is a global supplier of enterprise
search solutions for business and government.  The company's award-winning
software suite offers a broad range of search, navigation and discovery
solutions for desktop search, intranet search, SharePoint search and embedded
search applications.  ISYS has been deployed by thousands of organizations
operating in a variety of industries, including government, legal, law
enforcement, financial services, healthcare and recruitment.



Home