Chapter XIII: Front Matter (13)

This communication of one terrestrial hemisphere with the other is less surprising when we consider what modern historical works have shown, namely, that already about the Tenth Century, which would be nearly 400 years before Christopher Columbus, navigators from the coast of Norway had penetrated to the other hemisphere. The inhabitants of Mexico and Chili possess most authentic historical archives, which prove that a most advanced civilization flourished there at an early period. Gigantic monuments which still remain bear witness to the great antiquity of the civilization of the Incas (Peru) and of the Aztecs (Mexico). It is reasonable to suppose that the inhabitants of America, who thus advanced at a rapid pace in the path of civilization, descended from the hordes of Northern Asia which reached the New World by traversing the ice of Behring Strait.

To explain, therefore, the presence of man upon all parts of the continent, and in the islands, it is not necessary to insist upon the existence of several centres, where our species was created. If popular traditions went to show that all the regions now inhabited have always been occupied by the same people, and that those who are found there have constantly lived in the same places, there might be reason to admit the hypothesis of multiple creations of the human race; but, on the contrary, traditions for the most part teach us that each country has been peopled progressively by means of conquest or emigration. Tradition shows that the nomadic state of existence has universally preceded fixed settlements. It is, therefore, probable that the first men were constantly on the move. A flood of barbarians, coming from Central Asia, overflowed the Roman Empire, and the Vandals penetrated even into Africa. Modern migrations have been conducted on a still vaster scale, for at the present day we find America almost wholly occupied by Europeans; English, Spanish, and other people of the Latin race fill the vast American hemisphere, and the primitive populations of the New World have almost entirely disappeared, annihilated by the iron yoke of the conqueror.

The continent of Asia was peopled little by little by branches of the Aryan race, who came down from the plains of Central Asia, directing their course toward India. As to Africa: that continent received its contingent of population through the Isthmus of Suez, the valley of the Nile, and the coasts of Arabia, by the aid of navigation.

There is therefore nothing to show that humanity had several distinct nuclei. It is clear that man started from one point alone, and that through his power of adapting himself to the most different climates, he has, little by little, covered the whole face of the inhabitable earth.

There is another problem. Did the white, the yellow, and the black man exist from the first moment of the appearance of our species upon the globe, or have we to explain the formation of these three fundamental races by the action of climate, by any special form of nourishment, the result of local resources; in other words, by the action of the soil?

Innumerable dissertations have been written with a view of explaining the origin of these three races, and of connecting them with the climate or the soil. But it must be admitted that the problem is hardly capable of solution. The influence which a warm climate exercises upon the color of the skin is a well-known fact, and it is a matter of common observation that the white European, if transported into the heart of Africa, or carried to the coast of Guinea, transmits to his descendants the brown color which the skin of the Negro possesses, and that in their turn the offspring of Negroes, who have been brought into northern countries, become as they descend paler and paler and end by being white. But the color of the skin is not the only characteristic of a race; the Negro differs from the white, less by the color of his skin than by the structure of the face and cranium, as also by the proportion of his members to one another. Is it not, moreover, a fact that the hottest countries are inhabited by people with white skins? Such, for instance, are the Touaricks of the African Sahara, and the Fellahs of Egypt. On the other hand, men with black faces are found in countries enjoying a mean temperature, as, for instance, the inhabitants of California on the coast of the Pacific Ocean.

We have now another question to consider. Should these white, yellow, or black men, to whom we must add those who are brown and red, all of whom differ one from another in the color of their skin, in height, in their physiognomy, and in their outward appearance, be grouped into different species, or are we to regard them merely as varieties of species--that is to say, _races_?

Buffon, in his chapter upon _man_, a work which we can always read again with admiration and advantage, contents himself with bringing forward the three fundamental types of the human species which have been known from the first under the names of the white, black, and yellow race. But these three types in themselves do not exemplify every human physiognomy. The ancient inhabitants of America, commonly known as the Red-Skins, are entirely overlooked in this classification, and the distinction between the Negro and the white man can not always be easily pointed out, for in Africa the Abyssinians, the Egyptians, and many others, in America the Californians, and in Asia the Hindoos, Malays, and Javanese are neither white nor black.

1 and 2, Water Snakes (_Masticophis_); 3, Horned Toad (_Phrynosoma_); 4, 5, 11, 12, 13, American Toads; 6, Kangaroo Lizard (_Crotaphytus_); 7, Gila Monster (_Heloderma_); 8, Chuckwalla; 9, Harlequin Snake (_Elaps_); 10, Rattlesnake (_Crotalus)_]

Blumenbach, the most profound anthropologist of the last century, and author of the first actual treatise upon the natural history of man, distinguished in his Latin work, _De Homine_, five races of men, the Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, Malay, and American. Another anthropologist, Prochaska, adopted the divisions pointed out by Blumenbach, but united under the name of the _white race_, Blumenbach’s Caucasian and Mongolian groups, and added the _Hindoo race_.

The eloquent naturalist Lacépède, in his _Histoire naturelle de l’Homme_, added to the races admitted by Blumenbach the _hyperborean race_, comprising the inhabitants of the northern portion of the globe in either continent.

Cuvier fell back upon Buffon’s division, admitting only the white, black, and yellow races, from which he simply derived the _Malay_ and _American_ races.

A naturalist of renown, Virey, author of _l’Histoire naturelle du Genre humain_, _l’Histoire naturelle de la Femme_, and of many other clever productions upon natural history and particularly anthropology, gave much attention to the classification of the human races. But he was not favorable to the unity of our species, being led to entertain the opinion that the human species was twofold. This was the starting point of an erroneous deviation in the ideas of naturalists who wrote after Virey. We find Bory de Saint Vincent admitting as many as fifteen species of men, and another naturalist, Desmoulins, doubtless influenced by a feeling of emulation, distinguished sixteen human species, which, moreover, were not the same as those admitted by Bory de Saint Vincent.

This course of classification might have been followed to a much greater extent, for the differences among men are so great that if strict rule is not adhered to it is impossible to fix any limit to species. Unless therefore the principle of unity has been fully conceded at starting, the investigation may result in the admission of a truly indefinite quantity.

This is the principle which pervades the writings of the most learned of all the anthropologists of our age, Dr. Pritchard, author of a _Natural History of Man_, which in the original text formed ten volumes, but of which the French language possesses but a very incomplete translation.

Dr. Pritchard holds that all people of the earth belong to the same species; he is a partisan of the unity of the human species, but is not satisfied with any of the classifications already proposed, and which were founded upon organic characteristics. He, in fact, entirely alters the aspect of the ordinary classifications which are to be met with in natural history. He commences by pointing out three families, which, he asserts, were in history the first human occupants of the earth: namely, the _Aryan_, _Semitic_, and _Egyptian_. Having described these three families, Pritchard passes to the people who, as he says, radiated in various directions from the regions inhabited by them, and proceeded to occupy the entire globe.

This mode of classification, as we have pointed out, leaves the beaten track trodden by other natural historians. For this reason it has not found favor among modern anthropologists, and this disfavor has reacted upon the work itself, which, notwithstanding, is the most complete and exact of all that we possess upon man. Although it has been adopted by no other author, Pritchard’s classification of the human race appears to us to be the most sound in principle.

The classification of the human race which we propose to follow, modifying it where in our opinion it may appear to be necessary, is due to a Belgian naturalist, M. d’Omalius d’Halloy. It acknowledges five races of men: the white, black, yellow, brown, and red.

When we examine the form and relative size of the brain in ascending the series of mammiferous animals, we find that this organ increases in volume, and progresses, so to say, toward the superior characteristics which it is to display in the human species. The brain increases in importance from the zoophyte to the ape. But, in comparing the brain of the ape with that of man, an important difference becomes at once apparent. The brain of the gorilla, orang-outang, or chimpanzee, which are the apes that bear the greatest resemblance to man, and which for that reason are designated _anthropomorphous_ apes, is very much smaller than that of man.

The senses, taken individually, are not more developed in man than they are in certain animals; but in man they are characterized by their harmony, their perfect equilibrium, and their admirable appropriation to a common end. Man, it will at once be admitted, is not so keen of sight as the eagle, nor so subtle of hearing as the hare, nor does he possess the wonderful scent of the dog. His skin is far from being as fine and impressionable as that which covers the wing of a bat. But, while among animals, one sense always predominates to the disadvantage of the rest, and the individual is thus forced to adopt a mode of existence which works hand in hand with the development of this sense, with man, all the senses possess almost equal delicacy, and the harmony of their association makes up for what may be wanting in individual power.

Man is certainly better off, as regards the sense of sight, than a large majority of animals. Instead of being placed upon different sides of his head, looking in opposite directions, and receiving two images which can not possibly be alike, his eyes are directed forward, and regard similar objects, by which means the impression is doubled.

The sense of touch in man reaches a degree of perfection which it does not attain in animals. How marvelous is the sense of touch when exercised by applying the extremities of the fingers, the part of the body the best suited to this function, and how much more wonderful is the organ called the hand, which applies itself in so admirable a manner to the most different surfaces whose extent, form, or qualities we wish to ascertain!

“Man alone,” says Galen, “is furnished with hands, as he alone is a participator in wisdom.” The hand is a most marvelous instrument, and one most admirably adapted to his nature. Remove his hand, and man can no longer exist. By its means he is prepared for defence or attack, for peace or war. What need has he of horns or talons? With his hand, he grasps the sword and lance, he fashions iron and steel. While with horns, teeth, and talons animals can only attack or defend at close quarters, man is able to project from afar the instruments with which he is armed. Shot from his hand, the feathered arrow reaches at a great distance the heart of an enemy, or stops the flight of a passing bird. Although man is less agile than the horse and the deer, yet he mounts the horse, guides him, and thus successfully hunts the deer. He is naked and feeble, yet his hand procures him a covering of iron and steel. His body is unprotected against the inclemencies of climate, yet his hand finds him a convenient abode, and furnishes him with clothing. By the use of his hand, he gains dominion and mastery over all that lives upon the earth, in the air, or in the depths of the sea.

The sense of hearing, without attaining in man the perfection which it reaches in certain animals, is nevertheless of great delicacy, and becomes an infinite resource of instruction and pure enjoyment. Not only are differences of intonation, intensity, and timbre recognized by our ear, but the most delicate shades of rhythm and tone, the relations of simultaneous and successive sounds which give the sentiment of melody and harmony, are appreciated, and furnish us with the first and most natural of the arts--music.

Let us now pass to the bony portion of the human body, and consider first of all the head. The head is shared by two regions, the cranium and the face. The predominance of either of these regions over the other depends upon the development of the organs which belong to each.

The cranium contains the cerebral mass, that is, the seat of the intellect; the face is occupied by the organs appertaining to the principal senses. In animals, the face greatly exceeds the cranium in extent; the reverse is, however, the case with man. It is but rarely that with him the face assumes importance at the expense of the cranium--in other words, that the jaws become elongated, and give to the human face the aspect of a brute.

There is in the human face an anatomical characteristic of greater importance than any taken from the elongation of the cranium; that is, the projection forward, or the uprightness of the jaws. The term _prognathism_ (from πρὸ, forward, and γνάθος, jaw) is applied to this jutting forward of the teeth and jaws, and _orthognathism_ (from ὀρθὸς, straight, γηάθς, jaw) to the latter arrangement.

It was long admitted that prognathism, or projection of the jaws, was peculiar to the Negro race. But this opinion has been forced to yield to the discovery that projecting jaws exist among people in no way connected with the Negro. In the midst of white populations this characteristic is frequently met with; it is occasionally found among the English, and is by no means rare at Paris, especially among women. Prognathism would appear to be characteristic of a small European race dwelling to the south of the Baltic Sea, the Esthonians, and which itself is but the residue of the _primitive Mongolian_ race. It is probably the mixture of Esthonian blood with that of the inhabitants of Central Europe, which causes the appearance in our large cities of individuals whose faces are prognathous.

We can not close our remarks upon the face without speaking of a curious relation between it and the cranium, which has been much abused; we allude to the _facial angle_. By _facial angle_ is meant the angle which results from the union of two lines, one of which touches the forehead, the other of which, drawn from the orifice of the ear, meets the former line at the extremity of the front teeth.

The Dutch anatomist Camper, after having compared Greek and Roman statues, or medals of either nationality, assumed that the cause of the intellectual superiority which distinguished Greek from Roman physiognomies was to be found in the fact that, with the Greeks, the facial angle is larger than in Roman heads. Starting with this observation, Camper pursued his inquiries until it occurred to him to advance the theory that the increase of the facial angle may be taken in the human race as a sign of superior intelligence.

This observation was correct, insomuch as it separated men from apes, and carrion birds from other birds. But its application to different varieties of men, as a measure of their various degrees of intelligence, was a pretension doomed to be sacrificed to future investigations. Dr. Jacquart, assistant naturalist in the Museum of Natural History at Paris, calling to his aid an instrument he invented, by which the facial angle is rapidly measured, has, in our day, made numerous studies of the facial angle of human beings. M. Jacquart found that this angle can not be taken as a measure of intelligence, for he observed it to be a right angle in individuals who, with respect to intelligence, were in no way superior to others whose facial angle was much smaller.

Erect carriage is another of the characteristics which distinguish the human species from all other animals, including the ape, by whom this position is but rarely assumed, and then accidentally and unnaturally.

Everything in the human skeleton is calculated to ensure a vertical posture. In the first place, the head articulates with the vertebral column at a point so situated that, when this vertebral column is erect, the head, by means of its own weight, remains supported in equilibrium. Besides this, the shape of the head, the direction of the face, the position of the eye, and the form of the nostrils all require that man should walk erect on two feet.

J. J. Rousseau was, therefore, very far from right when he contended that man was born to go on all fours.

INDEX

A

Abbott, C. C., 1653

Abdelrahman Sûfi, 119

Acacia, 928, 950

Acalephian Hydroids, 459

Acalephs, 459

Acanth family, 483

Acephala, 459

Achenar, 57, 98, 147

Acorns, 1177

Acrogens, 455, 483, 1000

Adams, Prof., 431

Adanson, Michel, 994

Adanson’s region, 940

Adelsberg, cave of, 617-20

Æpyornis, 1524

Affinities, 1511-12

Afghans, 1672

Africa, deserts of, 947
fauna of, 1548-52
races of, 1675
vegetation in, 909-15

Agardh, 1266, 1267

Agassiz, 1213, 1297

Agriculture, progress of, 1091-99

Air, 773, 778-84

Airy, Sir George, 316, 806

Albatross, 1523

Alcor, 67, 81, 126-27, 196-97

Aldebaran, 57, 63, 96, 116, 124, 152, 187, 316

Alga, red snow, 514-15, 930

Algæ, 454, 455, 710, 712, 887, 888

Algol, 85, 128, 193, 208, 216-20

Alhazan, 799

Allen, Grant, 1003, 1104

Alligators, 1392, 1557, 1570, 1623

Aloes, 953

Alpha, Capricorni, 127
Centauri, 41, 57, 63, 99, 125, 134, 199, 204-5, 309
Cruci, 57
Eridani, 63
Orionis, 63

Alphabet, Greek, 65

Alphard, 188

Alpine plants, 930

Alps, glaciers of the, 510-13

Al-Sûfi, 60, 62, 63, 67, 68, 69, 163, 188, 193, 206, 219, 220

Altair, 57, 76, 85

Alternate generations, 962, 964-65, 1329

Amazon, the, 623, 625

America, fauna of, 1540, 1552-57
races of, 1672-73, 1677-78
vegetation in, 915-26

American Indians, 1677-78

Ammonites, 672

Amœba, 977-78

Anaxagoras, 376

Anchovy, 1544

Anderson, Dr., 68, 228-38

Andromeda, Constellation of, 78, 84

Andromedes, 281

Anemones, 1361

Angiosperms, 455, 890, 891-92, 958, 967

Angler-fish, 1569

Angström, 818

Animal, kingdom, 1296-1300, 1535
life, types of, 480

Animals, classification of, 1301-4
death-feigning instinct of, 1577-82
distribution of, 1520-35, 1561
dwellings of, 1601-2
fishing of, 1565-77
fur-bearing, 1547, 1554
hunting by, 1565-77
invertebrate, 1536
mimicry in, 1596, 1598-99
and plants, 976-78, 979-84, 1478
vertebrate, 1535

Annelids, 1603

Annulariæ, 469

Anogens, 455

Antares, 57, 76, 188

Ant-eater, 1571

Antennæ, 1439-45

Antherozoids, 1039

Anthers, 868, 1002

Antinous, 78

Ant-lions, 1417, 1568

Ants, 1408, 1409-11

Apes, 1626

Aphaniptera, 1419

Aphides, 1409-10, 1420

Apogamy, 967

Apospory, 967

Apothecia, 1212

Apple, of Carthage, 1095
Persian, 1095

Apteryx, 1524, 1528, 1561

Aquarius, 78

Arabians, 986, 1672, 1675

Arabs, the, 116-20

Arago, 54

Ararat, Mount, 500

Archegonia, 963

Archimedes, 64

Arcturus, 57, 63, 75, 86, 87, 122, 187, 315

Argelander, 58, 59, 62, 66, 68

Aristolochia, 956

Aristotle, 284
of Stagira, 986

Armadillo, 1555

Arnebia echioides. See _Prophet-Plant_

Arnold, Dr., 1069

Aroideæ, 952

Arrow, the, 77

Articulata, 481, 1303

Articulates, 459, 460

Arum, 952

Asia, fauna of, 1546-48
races of, 1672
vegetation in, 905-9

Ass, wild, 1546

Asteroids. See _Planetoids_

Astrocopium, 119

Astronomers, the first, 26

Atacama, desert of, 665

Atlantosaurus, 718

Atlas, 64
of Southern Stars, 61

Atlases, celestial, 65-66

Atmosphere, earth’s, 773-84

Atolls, 689-93, 699-707

Aurora, Borealis, 813-19
spectrum of, 346-47, 818
and sun, 817-18

Ausonius, 88-89

Australia, flora of, 886, 926-28
races of, 1673
vegetation in, 926-29

Avebury, Lord, 1105

B

Baboons, 1529

Bacon, Roger, 799

Bacteria, 648-54, 1131-35

Badger, 1616, 1617

Baer, Von, 1294

Baker, Sir S., 1566

Balance, the, 78

Balata, the, 1153-54

Balloon ascensions, 776-77

Baltimore Oriole, 1631

Bamboo, 1115-22

Banana, 942-43, 952

Banisteria, 953, 956

Banks, Sir Joseph, 1387

Banyan tree, 1169-70

Baobab, 941, 950

Barley, 944

Barometer, 785

Barnard, Prof., 155, 159, 263, 391, 419, 420

Bate, Spence, 1375, 1376

Bates, W. H., 1594, 1595, 1599

Bathybius haeckelii, 1306

Batrachia, 1379

Bats, 1547, 1550, 1555-56

Bauhinas, 953, 956

Baxendell, 344, 348

Bayer, John, 105

_Beagle_, the, 1665

Bear, the Great, 80-81, 122
the Little, 77, 82

Bears, 1543, 1546, 1553

Beaumont, Elie de, 572

Beaver, 1542, 1554

Beavers, 1639-46

Bee, 1408, 1552
eyes of, 1448
sting of, 1436

Beechnuts, 1178

Bee Hive in Cancer, 66, 130, 167, 176

Bees, 1426-27, 1478-79, 1496-98
wings of, 1429

Beetles, 1411-13, 1433-34, 1435, 1440, 1578

Behrmann, 61, 62, 66

Belemnites, 672

Bellatrix, 124

Bellerophon, 470

Bélopolsky, 315

Belts, homoiozoic, 1521

Bennett, Mr., 755, 758-59

Berenice’s Hair, 78, 153

Berosus, 501

Beta, Centauri, 57, 63
Crucis, 57

Betelgeuse, 57, 96, 124, 128, 187, 188

Bibra, 755

Biela, 300

Bignonia, 953, 956, 1165

Birds, 1578, 1582-93, 1622, 1624
of Africa, 1550-51
of America, 1556
of Asia, 1547
of Australia, 1559-60
of Europe, 1544
of New Zealand, 1561, 1608-9
of paradise, 1547
death-feigning of, 1577-82
emotions of, 1593
extinct, 1524-25, 1561
flight of, 1583
gigantic, 1524-25
migration of, 1523, 1537, 1590-92
mimicry in, 1596-97
moulting of, 1586
nests of, 1587-90, 1629-34
pairing of, 1586
primeval, 489-90
sounds of, 1584-85
tastes of, 1592

Birthwort, 1071-72

Bison, 1531

Bitter Lakes, 587

Bivalves, 459

Blumenbach, 1669, 1687

Blume’s region, 940

Boa Constrictor, 1548, 1557

Bode, 397

Bonald, Cardinal de, 1679

Bond, W. C., 418

Bonpland’s region, 941

Boötes, 75, 86, 87

Botanical regions, 939-41, 1143

Botany, 859, 985-86

Bower-bird, 1592, 1627-28

Brachiopods, 470, 482, 671

Brahmaputra, the, 623, 624

Brauer, 1422

Brazil-nut, 1179

Bread fruit, 942, 945

Brongniart, 471, 472, 995, 996

Brown, Robert, 999
region of, 941

Buckwheat, 945

Buff, Prof., 735

Buffalo, 1553
musk, 1533

Buffon, 1528, 1532, 1583, 1686

Bull, the, 78, 94, 96, 123-24

Bullhead, the, 1609

Bunt, 1200

Burian, the, 1144-45

Burmeister, 1401

Burnham, 201

Bush, Australian, 1139, 1140

Bustard, 1542

Butterflies, 1461-62, 1594-95
wings of, 1431-33

Byron, 762