the explanation of myths and practices in which fire is concerned. See
on this subject an intelligent though somewhat exaggerated critique by
E. Veckenstedt, “Das wilde, heilige und Gebrauchsfeuer,” _Zeitschr. für
Naturwiss._, vol. lxvi., p. 191, Leipzig, 1893.]
[Footnote 185: O. Mason, _Origins of Invention_, p. 158, London, 1895.]
[Footnote 186: Otis Mason, _loc. cit._, p. 158.]
[Footnote 187: _Internation. Arch. für Ethnographie_, vol. ix., pt. 3,
Leyden, 1896.]
[Footnote 188: _Revue scientifique_, 1892, 1st half-year, p. 145. It
is also from hygienic considerations in regard to the mouth that many
peoples of India and the Negroes of Senegal chew continually the dried
roots of different plants reputed antiseptic. In Siberia and in the
east of Russia the chewing of pine resin (“séra”) has probably the same
origin. The habit of chewing tobacco is only common among European
sailors and among the Javanese and Chukchi.]
[Footnote 189: Hellwald, _Rosselsprünge_, etc., p. 206]
[Footnote 190: H. Bates, _Naturalist on ... Amazons_, vol. i., p. 331,
London, 1863.]
[Footnote 191: Letourneau, _Sociologie_, p. 44, Paris, 1880.]
[Footnote 192: The beaten-earth and sun-dried clay structures of the
Sudan, of Turkestan, and Mexico are of “secondary formation”; they are
derived probably from the straw huts, as we shall see further on.]
[Footnote 193: We call every habitation “fixed” which has not been
constructed with the view of being removed, however light and imperfect
it be. Thus, the rude hut which the Fuegian abandons so readily is
nevertheless a fixed habitation, whilst the tent of the Kirghiz, a much
more complicated structure, and far more comfortable, must nevertheless
be classed among movable habitations.]
[Footnote 194: E. B. Tylor, _Anthropology_, p. 281.]
[Footnote 195: L. Hösel, “Die Rechteckige Schrägdachhütte
Mittelafrikas,” _Globus_, 1894, vol. xxvi., pp. 341, 360, and 378, with
map.]
[Footnote 196: There are many other types of dwellings peculiar
to different regions: the reed-built houses of Lob Nor (Eastern
Turkestan), the Finnish houses derived from semi-underground
structures, the dwellings of the Caucasian mountaineers, etc.]
[Footnote 197: This tent has never, as a general rule, been placed
among the Turco-Mongols on a waggon, to be carried from place to place,
as authors have been pleased to affirm, from Rubruquis to our own day.
The habit in question has only existed in some Nogaï tribes, and has
only been practised in special circumstances (marriage, conveyance of
women), the survival of which is found among the Tatars of Koundrov,
near Astrakhan.]
[Footnote 198: Kharouzin, _Istoria_, etc. (_History of the Development
of the Habitation among Turco-Mongol Nomads of Russia_), Moscow, 1896
(in Russian).]
[Footnote 199: It is possible that in Western Europe a hard leaf
of some plant folded in a certain way has served as a model for
the lamps with wicks called Roman, to judge from certain actual
forms.--Letourneau and Papillault, _Bull. Soc. Anthr. Paris_, 1896, p.
348. Vinchon, _ibid._, p. 615.]
[Footnote 200: Neis, _Excursions et Reconnaissances_, Saigon, vol. x.,
p. 33, 1881.]
[Footnote 201: Von den Steinen, _Unter d. Naturvölk, Zent. Brazil_,
Berlin, 1894, p. 190.]
[Footnote 202: Glaumont, “Usages, etc.,” _Rev. d’Ethnogr._, Paris,
1888, p. 101.]
[Footnote 203: C. Davidson, “Das Nackte, etc.,” _Globus_, vol. lxx.,
1896, No. 18.]
[Footnote 204: Mme. Dr. Gaches-Sarraute, _L’Hygiène du Corset_, Paris,
1896.]
[Footnote 205: This intentional deformation must be distinguished from
that which is caused by the manner of placing the child in the cradle.
This is always less strongly marked, and may pass unnoticed in the head
of the living subject, but it may always be recognised in the skull.]
[Footnote 206: See for the details, L. A. Gosse, _Essai déform. artif.
crâne_, Paris, 1885; Broca, _Instr. craniol._, 1875; P. Topinard,
_Revue Anthro._, 1879, p. 497, and _Elem. Anthro._, p. 744; Delisle,
_Déform. du crâne_, Paris, 1880, and _Congr. Américaniste_, Paris,
1892, p. 300; Ambialet, _L’Anthropologie_, 1893, p. 11.]
[Footnote 207: O. Mason, _loc. cit._, p. 274.]
[Footnote 208: Note also that almost everywhere foot-gear and often
head-gear are made from materials obtained from the mammals: leather,
fur, and felt.]
[Footnote 209: See for details W. Brigham, “Hawaiian Kapa-making,”
_Hawaiian Alman. and Annual_, p. 76. Honolulu, 1896.]
[Footnote 210: Tylor, _Anthropology_, p. 246.]
[Footnote 211: For details see G. de Mortillet, _Origines de la chasse,
de la pêche_, etc.; O. Mason, _loc. cit._; Tylor, _Anthrop._; Holmes,
_Fifteenth Rep. Bur. Ethnol._]
[Footnote 212: Weeren, “Analyse, etc.,” _Verh. Berl. Ges. Anthr._,
June-Oct. 1895.]
[Footnote 213: Reuleaux, _Hist. du développ. des machines dans
l’humanité_ (translated from the German), Paris, 1876 (extr. from the
section _Cinématique_).]
[Footnote 214: This is a long woven bag in which the tough warp and
woof run spirally and diagonally, so that when the two ends are forced
together the cylinder becomes short and wide, and when pulled apart, it
becomes long and slender.]
[Footnote 215: Hahn, _Die Hausthiere_, etc., Leipzig, 1896, in 8vo,
with map.]
[Footnote 216: This opinion of Hahn’s appears to be corroborated
by this fact, that millet is still the “national cereal” of the
Turkish peoples, who, like all other nomad shepherds, beginning with
hoe-culture, have arrived at their present state through having
preferred to breed animals other than those used in ploughing--that is
to say, the camel, sheep, and later, the horse.]
[Footnote 217: Th. Studer, “Beiträge zur Geschichte unserer
Hunderassen,” _Naturwissench. Wochenschrift_, 1897, No. 28. See also
_Mem. Soc. Hélvétique sciences naturelles_, 1896.]
[Footnote 218: K. Groos, _Die Spiele der Thiere_, 1896; _Die Spiele der
Menschen_, 1899.]
[Footnote 219: Roulette flourished among the Eskimo of Greenland in
the eighteenth century; it is known under the name of “Chombino” among
the Assiniboines and Blackfeet Indians.--H. Egede and Wied, cited by
Andree, _Ethnogr. Paral._, p. 104 (Neue Folge).]
[Footnote 220: See the interesting study on this game by Tylor, _Journ.
Anthr. Inst._, vol. viii., p. 116, and in _Internationales Archiv.
Ethnog._, suppl. vol. ix. (Festg. Bastian), Leyden, 1896.]
[Footnote 221: “Hawaiian Surf-Riding,” _Haw. Alman._, p. 106, Honolulu,
1896.]
[Footnote 222: See, for more details, the excellent article of Andree
on “Masks” in his _Ethnographische Parallele_, Neue Folge, p. 107.]
[Footnote 223: In this connection see E. Grosse, _Die Anfänge der
Kunst_, Freib. and Leip., 1894; Haddon, _Evolution in Art_, London,
1895; H. Stolpe, _Studies i Amerikansk Ornamentik_, Stockholm, 1896.]
[Footnote 224: Von den Steinen, _Unt. Natürvolk. Zent. Braz._, Berlin,
1894.]
[Footnote 225: See the plate at p. 77 of Haddon’s work, already quoted.]
[Footnote 226: Andree, _Eth. Paral._, N.F., p. 67.]
[Footnote 227: See on this subject I. Lang, _Billedkunst. Fremstell._,
etc.; _Vidensk. Selsk. Shrif._, 5th series; _Hist. Philos._, vol. v.,
No. 4, Copenhagen, 1892 (with French Summary).]
[Footnote 228: Wallaschek, _Primitive Music_, chap. viii., London,
1893.]
[Footnote 229: Grosse, _Anf. d. Kunst_, chap. iii.]
[Footnote 230: _Miss. Scientif. Cap Horn_; vol. i. _Hist. d. Voy._ by
Martial, p. 210, Paris, 1888.]
[Footnote 231: Tylor, _Anthropology_, p. 292; Wallaschek, _loc. cit._,
pp. 151, 155, and _Mitth. Anthr. Ges. Wien._, 1897, vol. xxiii.,
Sitzungsb., p. 11. According to the investigations of Weber, the ear
can distinguish sounds which vary 1/64th of a semitone.]
[Footnote 232: According to Wallaschek (_loc. cit._, p. 155), the
heptatonic scale (diatonic) owes its origin to the construction of the
primitive flute, which had at most six to eight holes. To have had more
would have been useless, as the instrument could not have been held
without more fingers. Facility in making this instrument is due to the
fact that, holes simply being pierced at regular intervals along the
tube, a series of the most harmonious sounds can be obtained.]
[Footnote 233: Here is a description of it: a quill split and cut into
the form of a leaf is attached to the end of a bow (Fig. 71); it is
held to the mouth and set vibrating; it is then a reed and a stringed
instrument combined. But it gives forth such feeble sounds that the
artist is obliged to stuff one of his fingers in his nose and the other
in his ear so as better to hear the music; it serves thus as a sort of
microphone.]
[Footnote 234: The only all-round study that I know is the chapter
“Poetry” in Grosse’s work, _Die Anf. d. Kunst_, from which I borrow my
account and some selected examples, which he gives from Eyre, Spencer,
and Grey.]
[Footnote 235: Deniker, “Les Kalmouks,” _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1884, p. 671.]
[Footnote 236: De Quatrefages, _L’espèce humaine_, 2nd ed., p. 356,
Paris, 1890.]
[Footnote 237: E. B. Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, vol. i.]
[Footnote 238: These Yahgans give the name of “Kachpik” vaguely to: 1,
very wicked imaginary beings living in the depth of the forests, and,
2, every person who has a strange or wicked character. They give the
name of “Hanuch” to: 1, imaginary beings with an eye at the back of
the head and no hair, and, 2, to madmen or individuals living alone in
the forests. It is the belief in these three or four imaginary beings
to which all religious manifestations of the Yahgans may be reduced.
(Hyades and Deniker, _loc. cit._, p. 253.)]
[Footnote 239: R. Woodthorpe, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxvi., No 1,
August 1896. In Yorkshire the country people call the night butterfly
(sphinx) “soul,” and in Ireland butterflies are the souls of ancestors
(L. Gomme, _Ethnology in Folklore_).]
[Footnote 240: Modigliani, _Un Viaggio a Nias_, p. 277, Milan, 1890.
Besides, the Nias admit, like many other peoples, three souls in man;
that which manifests itself by the breath is comparable to the “double”
of the ancient Egyptians.]
[Footnote 241: The word “fetichism” is a corruption of the Portuguese
term _feitiço_, “charm,” derived probably from the Latin _factitius_,
in the sense “full of magical artifices,” which the first navigators on
the coast of Guinea applied to the fetiches venerated by the Negroes.
Des Brosses was the first to introduce, in 1760, the term “fetichism”
to denote the belief in fetiches. Auguste Comte gave a much more
extended meaning to the word, to denote a religious state opposed to
polytheism and monotheism. To-day the fetichism of Auguste Comte is the
_animism_ of English ethnographers, of which true fetichism forms only
a part. (E. Tylor, _Prim. Cult._, vol. ii., p. 143.)]
[Footnote 242: In certain cases, fetiches are supposed to be animated
with power of movement; thus the staffs which negro sorcerers put into
the hands of men in convulsions, caused by wild dances, are reputed to
draw these men in their mad career, and to direct them in the search of
persons accused of crime. Similarly, the two staffs which the Siberian
Shamans hold in their hands during their exorcisms are supposed to draw
them, like horses driven at full gallop, towards regions inhabited by
spirits.]
[Footnote 243: Macpherson, quoted by Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, vol.
ii., p. 325.]
[Footnote 244: E. Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, vol. i., p. 427.]
[Footnote 245: Put forward by Tylor (_Prim. Cult._, vol. ii., chaps.
xii. and xvii.), the ideas which I here formulate have been developed
by L. Marillier (“Survivance de l’âme:” Paris, 1894, _Pub. École prat.
Hautes Études, sect. Sc. relig._), and combated by Steinmetz (_Arch.
für Anthro._, vol. xxiv., p. 577), but the arguments of the latter do
not seem to me convincing. He compares, for example, the difference of
the destiny of the noble and the common Polynesians in the other world
to distributive justice.]
[Footnote 246: Hyades and Deniker, _loc. cit._, p. 254.]
[Footnote 247: E. Tylor, _loc. cit._, vol. ii., p. 199.]
[Footnote 248: See A. Lang, _Culture and Myth_; and his _Modern
Mythology_, London, 1897.]
[Footnote 249: Legends, traditional tales, proverbs, etc., are
simplified myths, with the poetic element predominating. The study of
them forms a special branch of ethnology called “Folk-lore.”]
[Footnote 250: Hyades and Deniker, _loc. cit._, p. 316.]
[Footnote 251: Brough Smyth, _The Aborigines of Victoria_, vol. ii.,
p. 3, London, 1878; Curr, _The Australian Race_, Melbourne-London,
1886-87, 4 vols. _passim._]
[Footnote 252: R. Schramm, “Jahrform, etc.,” _Mittheil. der Geogr.
Gesell._, vol. xxvii., 1884, p. 481, Vienna.]
[Footnote 253: O. Mason, _Origins of Invention_, pp. 71 and 116.]
[Footnote 254: Brough Smyth, _loc. cit._, vol. i., p. 284.]
[Footnote 255: Schmeltz and Krause, “Museum Godeffroy,” Hamburg, 1881,
p. 271 and plate xxxii.]
[Footnote 256: S. Holm, _Meddelels. om Groenl._, p. 101, Copenhagen,
1887.]
[Footnote 257: See for the details, Andree, _Ethn. Paral._, p. 197.]
[Footnote 258: See Max Bartels, _Medecin der Naturvölker_, Leipzig,
1893.]
[Footnote 259: M. Monnier, _La France Noire_, p. 110, Paris, 1894.]
[Footnote 260: H. Schintz, _Deutsch Süd-west Africa_, p. 396,
Oldenburg, 1894.]
[Footnote 261: S. Wilken, _Verglijk_. _Volkenkunde van Nederl.
Ind._, p. 293, Leyden, 1893; Ivanowsky, _loc. cit._, p. 19 of the
original impression; Post, _Grundz. ethnol. Jurisprud._, vol. i.,
Oldenb.-Leipzig, 1894.]
[Footnote 262: Bartels, “Reife-Unsitten, etc.,” _Zeit. f. Ethn._,1896
(Verh., p. 363).]
[Footnote 263: Giraud-Teulon, _Origines du mariage et de la famille_,
p. 33, note, Paris, 1884; Wilken, _loc. cit._, p. 294.]
[Footnote 264: See for further details, Letourneau, _The Evolution of
Marriage, etc._, chap. i., London; and Westermarck, _History of Human
Marriage_, chaps. iv. to vi., London, 1891.]
[Footnote 265: Lubbock, _Origin of Civilisation_, chap. iii., 1875.]
[Footnote 266: The long list of peoples practising promiscuity given
by Lubbock dwindles as we become better acquainted with the different
populations in question. Certain peoples, like the Fuegians (Hyades
and Deniker, _loc. cit._), the Bushmen, the Polynesians (Westermarck,
_loc. cit._), the Irulas (Thurston, _Bull. Madras Mus._, vol. ii.,
No. 1, 1897), the Teehurs of Oude (W. Crooke, _Tribes and Castes N.
W. Province, etc._, vol. i., p. clxxxiii., Calcutta, 1896), should be
mercilessly struck out of this list, since they all have individual
marriage to the exclusion of other forms. Others, like the Australians,
the Todas, the Nairs, have been entered in it because they practise
“group marriage” or certain forms of polyandry, which is not the same
thing as promiscuity. There remains of the list but two or three tribes
about whom we have no exact general information at all (example, the
Olo-Ot of Borneo).]
[Footnote 267: A. W. Howitt, “Australian Group Relations,” _Smithsonian
Rep._, Washington, 1883; A. W. Howitt and L. Fison, “Kamilaroi and
Kurnai,” Melbourne-Sydney, 1880, and _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xii.,
p. 30, 1882.]
[Footnote 268: A. W. Howitt, “Dieri, etc.,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._,
vol. xx., 1890, p. 53. Among the Nairs of the coast of Malabar things
are done in exactly the same way. The main point in both cases is the
prohibition of marriage in the clan itself (L. Fison, “Classificat.
Relationship,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxv., 1895, p. 369). Among
the Todas of Nilgiri the groups are limited in this sense, that the men
who cohabit with a woman must be brothers, and at the same time can
only marry with the sisters of this woman.]
[Footnote 269: Bachofen, _Das Mutterrecht_, Stuttgart, 1861; J. F.
McLennan, _Studies in Ancient History_, London, 1876.]
[Footnote 270: L. Fison, _loc. cit._, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol.
xxiv., 1895, p. 36.]
[Footnote 271: Thus, if there are four clans, A, B, C, and D, as among
the Kamilaroi, for example, the children sprung from the parents of
the clans A and B may not intermarry; they belong to the clan C,
the members of which may only marry with the members of the clan D.
It is their children only who will be able to contract marriages in
the groups A and B. In this way incest is only possible between the
grandfather and the granddaughter, that is to say, reduced practically
to zero.]
[Footnote 272: L. Morgan, “Syst. of Consanguinity, etc.,” _Smithson.
Contrib. Knowl._, vol. xvii., Washington, 1871; and _Ancient Society_,
London, 1877. See also the very clear statement of the system in
Lubbock, _loc. cit._, and its extension to the Australians and the
Melanesians of the Fiji Islands in Howitt and Fison, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 273: Tylor, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol xviii., 1888-89, p.
262.]
[Footnote 274: Westermarck, _loc. cit._, p. 82; L. Fison, _loc. cit._
(“Classific. System”), p. 369.]
[Footnote 275: Maine, _Ancient Law_, p. 241, London, 1885; Westermarck,
_loc. cit._, p. 510.]
[Footnote 276: Shortt, _Transact. Ethn. Soc._, London, N.S., vol.
vii., p. 264; Haxthausen, _Transcaucasia_, p. 403, London, 1854.
Leroy-Beaulieu (_L’Empire des Tzars_, vol. vi., chap. 5, p. 488, Paris,
1885-89) attributes this custom to the over-exercise of paternal
authority.]
[Footnote 277: The Torgoot Mongols, who practise this custom, explain
it by the general rules of hospitality (Ivanovski, _loc. cit._); in
this respect they are in agreement with Westermarck, _loc. cit._, chap.
vi.]
[Footnote 278: It must be observed on this point that, according to
Westermarck, the horror of incest is not an instinctive sentiment
(animals do not have it), but rather a social habit springing from
sexual repulsion for persons, even unrelated to the family, with whom
one has been brought up from infancy. Thus we often see marriages
prohibited between one village and another (ancient Peru), or between
god-parents, who superintend the baptism of a child, and are in no
way allied to each other by blood (Russia). The learned Helsingfors
professor, who believes in the omnipotence of sexual selection,
explains the frequency of the aversion to incest by the survival of
individuals who did not contract consanguineous marriages, always
mischievous in his opinion. However, he admits that the bad effects of
consanguineous marriages may be mitigated by material well-being, as is
the case in Europe.]
[Footnote 279: See Ploss, _Das Weib_, 5th ed., vol. ii., 1897, Leipzig.]
[Footnote 280: E. Tylor, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xviii., p. 248.]
[Footnote 281: Ploss (_loc. cit._) mentions Australian, Eskimo, and
North American Indian tribes among whom the child is suckled till the
age of fourteen or fifteen.]
[Footnote 282: For an illustration of this see the “Description of
Australian Initiation” (Bura), by R. Mathews, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._,
vol. xxv., 1896, No. 4.]
[Footnote 283: Deniker, “Le peuple Tchouktch, etc.” (from
Avgustinovich), _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1882, p. 323, and De Windt, _Globus_,
1897, vol. lxxi., p. 300.]
[Footnote 284: Tylor, _loc. cit._ (_Anthr._), pp. 346, 420.]
[Footnote 285: In various countries in Europe these objects give place
to a piece of money put into the mouth or the hand of the dead; as one
never knows what may happen, it is always well to have a little money
at one’s service.]
[Footnote 286: Many practices in relation to the dead are explained by
the belief that they are sleeping for a greater or less time (see p.
216). Thus, among the Micronesians of the Gilbert Islands, the woman
sleeps by the side of her dead husband, and covers her body with the
putrid matter which oozes from the corpse.]
[Footnote 287: Even in the cases where several arrows have pierced the
animal their reciprocal positions decided to whom belonged such or such
part of the slain animal; the skin, for instance, was his whose arrow
had penetrated nearest to the heart.]
[Footnote 288: Kovalewsky, _Tableau des origines de la famille, etc._,
pp. 59 and 91, Stockholm, 1890; Maine, _Early History of Institutions_,
London, 1875.]
[Footnote 289: G. L. Gomme, _The Village Community_, London, 1890; and
Kovalewsky, _loc. cit._ Baden-Powell, _Indian Village Com._, London,
1896.]
[Footnote 290: J. G. Frazer, _Totemism_, London, 1887 (expanded from
his article in vol. xxiii. of the _Encyclopædia Britannica_); E. Smith,
_Second Ann. Rep. Bur. of Ethnol._, 1880-81, p. 77, Washington, 1883.]
[Footnote 291: This family _régime_ of society is closely allied to
the worship of ancestors and the “hearth,” as the names given to the
communities show (“feu” in France, “pechtchiché” in the Ukraine).]
[Footnote 292: Laveleye, _Propriété primitive_, p. 9, Paris, 1891;
Kovalewsky, _loc. cit._, _passim_; Sakuya Yoshida, _Geschichtl.
Entwickl. d. Staats-Verfass. in Japan_, p. 46, Hague, 1890; Bancroft,
_Native Races of Pacific States_, vol. ii., p. 226, San Francisco,
1882.]
[Footnote 293: See Andree, _Ethnolog. Parallele_, p. 250.]
[Footnote 294: See for further details, Post, _loc. cit._, _Grundriss
der ethnol. Jurisprud._, vol. i.]
[Footnote 295: See for more details, Ch. Letourneau, _L’évolution de
la Morale_, Paris, 1887, and A. Post, _loc. cit._, 2nd vol., Leipzig,
1895.]
[Footnote 296: The most common ordeals are the trial by water (swimming
across a river, remaining some time under water, etc.) and that by
fire. In the latter case the accused is made to run on hot coals, as in
India, among the Somalis, in Siam; to lick red-hot iron, as among the
Dyaks, the Khonds, the Negroes of Sierra-Leone; or again, to dip the
hands in molten lead, as in Burma among the Jakuns of Malacca, or the
Alfurus of Buru, etc.]
[Footnote 297: Schmeltz and Krause, _Ethnogr.-Anthr. Abt. Mus.
Godeffroy_, p. 17, Hamburg, 1881; W. Powell, _Wanderings amongst
Cannibals of New Britain_, London, 1883; Graf von Pfeil, “Duk-Duk,
etc.,” _Journ. Anthr. Institute_, 1897, p. 197.]
[Footnote 298: G. Schultheiss, _Globus_, 1896, vol. lxx., No. 22.]
[Footnote 299: The custom of applying the nose to the cheek and drawing
a breath, with closed eyes and a smacking of the lips, exists among the
Southern Chinese, but only as an act of love. According to P. D’Enjoy,
it is an olfactory gesture derived from the sensations of nutrition,
as the European kiss on the lips is derived from the lascivious bite.
(_Bull. Soc. Anthr._, Paris, 1897, pt. 2.)]
[Footnote 300: See for details Ling Roth, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol.
xix., 1889, p. 164; Andree, _Eth. Paral._, N.F., p. 225; Hellwald,
_Rosselsp._, p. 1.]
[Footnote 301: The difference between offensive and defensive weapons
is often not very marked even in our civilisation; thus the sword and
the sabre serve as much for giving as warding off blows; the same is
true among savages in regard to the staff, the club, etc. Frequently,
too, objects which originally have nothing in common with war, become
offensive or defensive weapons. Thus the bracelet is sometimes a
defensive weapon. Among several Negroes (Ashantis, Kafirs, Vakambas),
and in Melanesia, warriors put on their legs and arms bracelets formed
of the long hair of different animals (goat, boar, zebra) which almost
completely cover the limbs and protect them effectually against the
blows of club and spear. The bracelets of wire rolled in numerous
spirals around the fore-arm or the leg, which are met with among the
Dyaks, the Mois of Indo-China, the Niam-Niams, and the Baghirmis
of Central Africa, are veritable protective armour; they are the
prototypes of the vantbrace and greaves.
In certain rarer cases the bracelet is an offensive weapon. Among the
Jurs, a negro tribe of the upper Nile, bracelets are found provided
with two points or spurs, four inches long, and very dangerous. The
bracelet of the Irengas (to the east of the upper Nile), as well as
that of the Jibba (living on the banks of the Jibba, a left-hand
tributary of the Sabba), is a great disc, with an opening in the
middle through which to pass the arm. A portion of the disc is removed
in order to give it more elasticity, and its outer edge, exceedingly
sharp, forms a kind of circular sabre. In order not to wound himself,
the wearer covers the edge with a circular case which he only removes
for battle.]
[Footnote 302: See for details and series of forms, Lane-Fox (now Pitt
Rivers), _Cat. Anthr. Collection in the Bethnal Green Museum_, London,
1877, with illustrations. (The remarkable collection in question is now
at Oxford.)]
[Footnote 303: O. Mason, “Throwing-sticks,” _Rep. U.S. N. Mus. for
1884_; F. v. Luschan, “Wurfholz, etc.,” _Festschr.... Bastian_, p. 131,
Berlin, 1896.]
[Footnote 304: See H. Balfour, “On the Structure and Affinities of the
Composite Bow,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, London, 1889, vol. xix., p. 220;
Anuchin, _Look i Strely_ (Bow and Arrows), Moscow, 1889 (in Russian);
O. Mason, “Bows, Arrows, and Quivers of the North American Aborigines,”
_Smithsonian Report_, Washington, 1893.]
[Footnote 305: Phillips, _Trans. N. Zeal. Inst._, vol. x., p. 97,
Wellington, 1877.]
[Footnote 306: M. Buch, _Die Wotiaken_, p. 78, Helsingfors, 1882;
Extract from _Acta Soc. Scient. Fennicæ_, vol. xii.]
[Footnote 307: The prototype of the _true composite bow_, characterised
by the addition to it of a mass of moistened sinews which, on
drying, make the bow curve up, must have had another form; it bore a
resemblance probably to the bow of the Indian tribes of the north-west
of America and of California, in which the sinew covering often goes
beyond the body of the bow and hangs down at its two extremities.
The improved forms of the composite bow are only found on the Asiatic
continent. The so-called “Tatar” or Mongolian bow, the Chinese “kung,”
is chiefly composed of a piece of wood to which is fixed with bird-lime
on the inner side a piece of horn, and on the outer side two layers
of sinews covered with two layers of birch-bark. All other composite
bows, Persian, Hindu, etc., are only complicated forms of this type, to
which we may also refer the exceptional types of bow of the Lapp and
Javanese, etc.
Accepting the view of General Pitt Rivers, _loc. cit._, we may say that
the composite bow is not a more perfect weapon than the simple bow, and
that it could only have had its origin in countries where the absence
of very elastic varieties of wood make it necessary to seek in the
superposition of various materials the elasticity required to augment
the force of the weapon.]
[Footnote 308: The substance used in the manufacture of the bow-string
varies with the region; thus in the west of Africa it is always of
rattan, as far as Butembo (country of the Ponondas), where strings of
_Crotalaria_ and bamboo begin to be used. (Weule, _Ethnol. Notizblatt.
Mus. Berlin_, vol. i., No. 2, p. 39, 1895-96.)]
[Footnote 309: E. Morse, “Ancient and Modern Methods of Arrow-release,”
_Essex Inst. Bull._, Salem, Oct.-Dec., 1885.]
[Footnote 310: With regard to greaves, see the note on p. 257.]
[Footnote 311: W. Hough, “Prim. Am. Armour,” _Rep. U.S. Nat. Mus. for
1893_, p. 625, Washington, 1895.]
[Footnote 312: O. Mason, _loc. cit._, p. 364.]
[Footnote 313: Letourneau, _L’évolution du commerce_, Paris, 1897.]
[Footnote 314: Kubary, _Ethn. Beitr. Karolinen-Archipel._, p. 1,
Leyden, 1889-95.]
[Footnote 315: Balfour, _Journ. Anthro. Inst._, vol. xix., 1889, p. 54.]
[Footnote 316: Nillsson, _Ureinwohner Skand. Nordens_, p. 37, Hamburg,
1866, i. Nachtr.]
[Footnote 317: Cooper, _The Mishmee Hills_, London, 1873.]
[Footnote 318: It is the English who have given to this porcelain the
name of _cauri_ or cowry, which appears to be a corruption of the
Sanscrit word _Kaparda_, _Kapardika_, whence _Kavari_ in the Mahratta
dialect; the Portuguese call it _Bouji_ or _Boughi_; the inhabitants of
the Maldives, _boli_; the Siamese, _bios_ (which means shell in general
in their language); the Arabs, _wadda_ or _vadaat_.]
[Footnote 319: Martens, “Über verschiedene Verwendungen von
Conchylien,” _Zeit. für Ethn._, Berlin, 1872, vol. iv., p. 65; Andree,
_Ethnol. Parall._, p. 233; Stearns, “Ethno-conchology,” _Report U.S.
Nat. Mus. for 1887_.]
[Footnote 320: In 1858, 2,938 piculs of cowry-shells (about 177 tons)
were exported from Manilla, for the most part to England. In 1848,
59-1/2 tons of cowries were imported into Liverpool. At the time of the
Dutch dominion of Ceylon, Amsterdam was the principal market of this
trade; there were sold there in 1689 192,951 pounds (Dutch) of these
shells; and in 1780 133,229 pounds (Johnston).]
[Footnote 321: O. Mason, _loc. cit._, p. 327, and “Prim. Travel and
Transport,” _Smithsonian Report U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1894_, p. 239,
Washington, 1896.]
[Footnote 322: D. Anuchin, “Sani, etc.” (The sledge, the canoe, and
horses in funeral rites, in Russian), _Drévnosti_ (_Antiquities_), vol.
xiv., Moscow, 1890.]
[Footnote 323: See the Assyrian bas-reliefs, Maspero, _Hist. anc.
de l’Orient_, vol. ii., p. 628, Paris, 1897; O. Mason, _Origins of
Invention_, p. 334; and Moser, _A travers l’Asie Centrale_, p. 220,
Paris, 1885.]
[Footnote 324: See for the history of classifications, Topinard,
_L’Anthr. gén._, pp. 28-107, 264-349; Giglioli, _Viaggio ... della
Magenta_, p. xxvii., Milan, 1875; and Keane, _Ethnology_, p. 162,
Cambridge, 1896.]
[Footnote 325:
_Principal Races._ _Secondary Races._
(1) Caucasian. (1) Caucasian, (2) Alleghanian (Red Indian).
(2) Mongolian. (3) Hyperborean (Lapps), (4) Malay, (5)
American (except the Red Indian), (6)
Mongolian, (7) Paraborean (Eskimo),
(8) Australian.
(3) Ethiopian. (9) Kafir, (10) Ethiopian, (11) Negro,
(12) Melanesian.
(4) Hottentot. (13) Hottentot.
--Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, “Classif. Anthropologique,” _Mem. Soc.
Anthr. Paris_, vol. i., p. 125, 1861.]
[Footnote 326:
_Principal Races._ _Secondary Races or “Modifications.”_
(1) Negroid. (1) Bushmen, (2) Negro, (3) Papuan.
(2) Australoid. (4) Australians, (5) Black race of Deccan
(Dravidians), (6) Ethiopian (Hamite).
(3) Mongoloid. (7) Mongol, (8) Polynesian, (9) American,
(10) Eskimo, (11) Malay.
(4) Xanthochroid. (12) Xanthochroid of Northern Europe.
(5) Melanochroid. (13) Melanochroid of Southern Europe, (14)
Melanochroid of Asia (Arabs, Afghans,
Hindus, etc.).
--T. Huxley, “Geogr. Distrib. of Mankind,” _Journ. Ethnol. Soc.
London_, N.S., vol. ii., p. 404, map, 1870. The classification of
Flower (_Jl. Anthro. Inst._, vol. xiv., 1885, p. 378) differs from that
of Huxley in a few details only. This eminent anatomist grouped his
eleven races and three sub-races under three “types”--Negro, Mongolian,
and Caucasian.]
[Footnote 327: In the first edition of his classification (_Rev.
d’Anthr._, 2nd series, vol. i., p. 509, Paris, 1878), Topinard admits
sixteen races in three groups:--
(_a_) _Straight-haired Races._--Eskimo, Red Indians, Mexico-Peruvians,
Guarani-Caribs, Mongols.
(_b_) _Wavy or Frizzy-haired Races._--Fair-haired people of Europe
(Xanthochroids of Huxley), dark-haired people of Europe and Semites
(Melanochroids of Huxley), Australians and Indo-Abyssinians
(Australoids of Huxley), Fulbé, Finns, Celto-Slavs, Turanians.
(_c_) _Woolly-haired Races._--Bushmen, Papuans, Kafirs, Negritoes.
In the second edition, dating from 1885 (_Elém. Anthr. gén._, p. 502),
we find nineteen races grouped under three heads:--
(_a_) _White Leptorhine Races._--Anglo-Scandinavians, Finns (first
type, Western), Mediterraneans, Semito-Egyptians, Lapono-Ligurians,
Celto-Slavs.
(_b_) _Yellow Mesorhine Races._--Eskimo, Tehuelches, Polynesians, Red
Indians, yellow peoples of Asia (including Finns of the second type),
Guaranis (or South Americans, except the Tehuelches), Peruvians.
(_c_) _Black Platyrhine Races._--Australians, Bushmen, Melanesians,
Negroes, Tasmanians, Negritoes.]
[Footnote 328: Tribes (sub-divisions): (1) _Lophocomi_ (woolly
hair, tufted), comprising the following species (races): Papuans,
Hottentots; (2) _Eriocomi_ (woolly hair, growing uniformly and not
in tufts): Kafirs and Negroes; (3) _Euthycomi_ (straight hair):
Australians, Malays, Mongols, Arctic people (Hyperboreans), Americans;
(4) _Euplocomi_ (curly hair): Dravidians, Nubians (Ethiopians),
Mediterraneans (Aryans). (Haeckel, _Natürl. Schöpfungsgesch._, 7th ed.,
pp. 628 and 647, 1879; Fr. Mueller, _Allg. Ethnogr._, 2nd ed., pp. 17
and 19, Vienna, 1879.)]
[Footnote 329: “Trunks”: (1) _Negro_, with its “branches,”
Indo-Melanesian, Australian, African, and Austro-African; (2) _Yellow_,
with its “branches,” Siberian, Thibetan, Indo-Chinese, and American
(Eskimo-Brazilian); (3) _White_, with its “branches,” Allophyle (Ainu,
Miao-tse, Caucasian, Indonesian-Polynesian, etc.), Finnish, Semitic,
and Aryan. “Mixed Races”: (1) _Oceanians_ (Japanese, Polynesian,
Malay); (2) _Americans_ (of North, Central, and South America). (A. de
Quatrefages, _Hist. Gen. Races Hum._, pp. 343 _et seq._, Paris, 1889.)]
[Footnote 330: Deniker, “Essai d’une classification des races hum.,
etc.,” Paris, 1889 (_Extr. du Bull. Soc. Anthr._, vol. xii., p. 320).
Cf. O. Mason, _Smithson. Report for 1889_, p. 602.]
[Footnote 331: Fig. 153 represents individuals of one tribe only, but
belonging to the two sub-races mentioned. Fig. 151 represents the
blending of the two types with Polynesian admixture.]
[Footnote 332: E. Schmidt, “Die Anthropologie Indiens,” _Globus_, vol.
61, 1892, Nos. 2 and 3.]
[Footnote 333: Ehrenreich, _loc. cit._ (_Urbewohner Brasil._), and Von
den Steinen, _loc. cit._, describe numerous individuals with wavy or
frizzy hair among the Bakairis, the Karayas, the Arawaks, etc. I myself
have noticed Fuegians with frizzy or wavy hair (Hyades and Deniker,
_loc. cit._). See also Fig. 171, which represents the blending of
the Central American and South American types, and portraits of the
_Goajires_ in _Le Tour du Monde_, 1898, 1st half year.]
[Footnote 334: A. Barcena, “Arte ... lengua Toba,” _Rev. Mus. de la
Plata_, vol. v., 1894, p. 142.]
[Footnote 335: Bain, _Census of India, 1891_. Calcutta, 1896.]
[Footnote 336: Each continent in fact contains distinct populations,
with the exception, however, of Asia, to which belongs half a score of
peoples, of whom part live outside its borders: in America (Eskimo),
Oceania (Malays and Negritoes), Africa (Arabs), Europe (Samoyeds,
Vogule-Ostiaks, Tatars, Kirghiz, Kalmuks, Caucasians, Armenians, and
Russians), or in other parts of the world (Greeks, Jews, Gypsies).]
[Footnote 337: See for details, De Mortillet, _Le Préhistorique_,
chap. iii., Paris, 1883; Stirrup, “So-called Worked Flints of Thenay,”
_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xiv., 1885, p. 289, and _Rev. d’Anthr._,
1885; Cartailhac, _La France Préhistorique_, p. 35, Paris, 1889;
Newton, “The Evidence for the Existence of Man in the Tertiary Period,”
_Proceed. Geolog. Assoc._, vol. xv., London, 1897; Salomon Reinach,
_Antiquités Nationales, Descrip. Musée St.-Germain_, vol. i., p. 96,
Paris, 1889,--this work contains a mass of prehistoric information and
a copious bibliography.]
[Footnote 338: The so-called tertiary skeleton of Castenedolo, near
Brescia, discovered by Ragazonni, is an “odd fact,” an “incomplete
observation,” to use the happy phrase of Marcellin Boule, and cannot be
taken into account.]
[Footnote 339: J. Geikie, _Great Ice Age_, London, 1894; Marcellin
Boule, “Paléontol. stratigr. de l’Homme,” _Rev. d’Anthr._, Paris, 1888.]
[Footnote 340: The extreme limit of the spread of glaciers to the south
at that period may be indicated by a line which would pass near to
Bristol, London, Rotterdam, Cologne, Hanover, Dresden, Cracow, Lemberg;
then would go round Kief on the south, Orel on the north, and rise
again (on the south of Saratov) up to Nijni-Novgorod, Viatka, the upper
valley of the Kama, to blend with the line of the watershed of this
river and the Pechora (see Map 1.).]
[Footnote 341: See G. and A. de Mortillet, _Musée préhistorique_,
Paris, pl. vi. to ix.; J. Evans, _Ancient Stone Implements_, 2nd ed.,
chap. xxiii., London, 1897.]
[Footnote 342: Frequently these implements have been found, in
sufficiently deep beds, beside bones of the straight-tusked elephant
(_Elephas antiquus_), the smooth-skinned, two-horned rhinoceros
(_Rhinoceros Merckii_), the great hippopotamus--that is to say,
of animals characteristic of the first interglacial period. As
these species are allied to the elephant, the rhinoceros, and the
hippopotamus of Africa of the present day, the hypothesis has been
propounded that they came from this continent, utilising the numerous
isthmuses then existing (between Gibraltar and Morocco, between Sicily,
Malta and Tunis, etc.). Man, the maker of the Chellean implements,
followed, it is supposed, in their steps. One might argue with equal
force that the migration took place in the opposite direction.]
[Footnote 343: Woldrich (after Nehring), _Mit. Anthr. Gesell._, vol.
xi., p. 187, Vienna.]
[Footnote 344: In England it is sometimes designated the “cave period”
to distinguish it from the Chellean, called “River-drift” period, but
this term is open to objection; thus, for example, in the celebrated
Kent cavern there have been found at the bottom implements of the
Chellean type identical with certain objects of the River-drift. (See
the works already quoted, as well as Windle, _Life in Early Britain_,
p. 26, London, 1897.)]
[Footnote 345: According to G. de Mortillet, Mousterian industry also
differs from the Chellean in regard to technique. In the Chellean
period what is utilised is the core or nucleus of the stone cut right
round on both sides; while in the Mousterian period what are fashioned
are the splinters struck off from this core, which are trimmed
especially on one face, the inner face remaining smooth and showing the
trace of its origin under the form of a “cone” or “bulb of percussion,”
which corresponds to a hollow in the block from which the splinter
has been dislodged. However, implements recalling at first sight the
“knuckle-duster,” but which differ from it by their amygdaloidal form
and their straight edges (Saint-Acheul type), are still to be found at
this period.]
[Footnote 346: In G. de Morlillet’s classification a yet additional
period is inserted between the Mousterian and the Magdalenian. This is
the _Solutrian_, characterised by finely cut heads (spear or arrow?)
in the shape of a laurel leaf. But the zone in which these implements
are met with is limited to certain regions of the south and west of
France only. For many palæethnographers this is a “facies local” of the
Magdalenian period.]
[Footnote 347: There may be added to the masterpieces here reproduced
the famous representation of the mammoth carved on the tusk of this
animal itself by a man of La Madeleine (Dordogne), discovered and
described by Lartet; and by Boyd Dawkins, _Early Man in Brit._, p. 105,
London, 1880. See Cartailhac, _loc. cit._, p. 72.]
[Footnote 348: After the second interglacial period the “Great Baltic
Glacier” still covered the Scandinavian peninsula, with the exception
of its southern part (Gothland), extended over the emerged bottom of
the Baltic, over nearly the whole of Finland, and spreading round
Gothland invaded the east coast of Denmark and the littoral of Germany
to the east of Jutland. After the retreat of this glacier and a series
of changes in the surface of the ground (a sinking which brought the
Baltic into communication with the North Sea by means of the Strait of
Svealand, followed by the upheaval which cut off that communication and
made of the Baltic the _Ancylus Lake_ of the geologists), the climate
became milder in these parts, and the trees of Central Europe, first
the pines, then the oaks and birches, penetrated into Denmark and
Gothland, while in the north of Sweden there were two other new glacier
movements. (Gerard de Geer, _Om Skandinavens Geografiska Utveckling_,
Stockholm, 1897; G. Andersson, _Geschichte Végétat. Schwed._, Leipzig,
1896.)]
[Footnote 349: This supposition is invalidated by this fact among
others, that, in the neolithic “shell heaps” of Scandinavia no remains
of the reindeer are found.]
[Footnote 350: As witnessed by the diggings of Piette at Mas d’Azil,
see p. 163.]
[Footnote 351: There was yet to take place another sinking of the
ground which established a communication, by means of the Sound,
between the “Ancylus Lake” of the preceding period with the North Sea,
transforming it thus into a very salt and warm sea called, from the
principal fossil which reveals to us its existence, the Littorina Sea.]
[Footnote 352: Nehring, _Zeitschr. f. Ethnol._, 1895, No. 6 (Verh.,
pp. 425 and 573); Salomon Reinach, _L’Anthropologie_, 1897, p. 53; P.
Salmon, _Races hum. préhist._, p. 9, Paris, 1888; Cartailhac, _loc.
cit._, p. 327; M. Boule, _loc. cit._, p. 679; G. de Mortillet, _La
Format. de la Nat. Franc._, p. 289.]
[Footnote 353: Out of forty-six skulls to which the title “quaternary”
has been applied, I have only been able, after a careful examination
of all evidence, to recognise as such the ten to fifteen following
skulls. For the age of the mammoth or “Mousterian” period, seven
skulls certainly quaternary: two skulls from Spy (Belgium), and those
from Egisheim (Alsace), Olmo (Val d’Arno, Italy), Bury St. Edmunds
(England), Podbaba (Bohemia), and Predmost (Moravia). Perhaps we
should refer to this period the skulls which cannot be definitely
traced to a certain alluvial bed, like those of Neanderthal (Rhenish
Prussia), Denise (Auvergne), Marcilly-sur-Eure (Eure), La Truchère
(Saône), and Tilbury (near London). As to the skulls of the “reindeer”
age (Magdalenian period), three only are known which are not called
in question: these are the skulls of Laugerie-Basse, Chancelade
(Dordogne), and Sordes (Landes). Perhaps we should include among
them the skulls of uncertain date, like those of Bruniquel, Engis,
Sargels (near Larzac), and perhaps others which certain authorities
classify as belonging to mesolithic and even neolithic times: the three
skulls of Cro-Magnon (Dordogne); the six so-called Mentone skulls
(Baoussé-Roussé, Maritime Alps); the skulls of the _Trou de Frontal_
at Furfooz (Belgium), of Solutré (Valley of the Saône), Bohuslan (near
Stangenas, Sweden), Clichy and Grenelle (Paris). And, lastly, we have
no data on which to form an opinion as to the date of the skulls of
Canstatt (Wurtemberg), Maëstricht (Holland), Gibraltar, Brux (Bohemia),
Lhar, Nagy-Sap (Hungary), Schebichowitz (Bohemia), Valle do Areciro
(Portugal), etc. Cf. S. Reinach, _loc. cit._ (_Antiquités Nation._), p.
134; and Hervé, _Rev. École Anthr._, p. 208, Paris, 1892.]
[Footnote 354: The instances of the skull of Saint Mensuy, an Irish
bishop, and others, are universally known. See on this subject, Godron,
_Mem. Acad. Stanislas_, p. 50, Nancy, 1884; Worthington Smith, _Man,
the Primeval Savage_, p. 38, London, 1893; and W. Borlase, _The Dolmens
of Ireland_, vol. iii., p. 922, London, 1897.]
[Footnote 355: De Quatrefages and Hamy, _Cr. Ethn._, p. 44; De
Quatrefages, _Hist. Gén. Races Hum._, vol. i., p. 67; Hervé, _Rev.
École. Anthr._, Paris, 1893, p. 173; 1894, p. 105; 1896, p. 97.]
[Footnote 356: Hervé, “Les brachycéphales néolith.,” _Rev. École.
Anthr._, Paris, 1894, p. 393; and 1895, p. 18.]
[Footnote 357: J. Beddoe, _The Races of Britain_, Bristol-London,
1885, and “Hist. de l’indice ceph. dans les îles Britan.,”
_L’Anthropol._, 1894, p. 513; Windle, _loc. cit._, p. 9; Inostrantsev,
_Doïstoritcheskii_, _etc._ (_Prehistor. Man of Ladoga_), St.
Petersburg, 1882, fig. and pl.]
[Footnote 358: Montelius, _Temps. préhist. en Suède_, p. 41, Paris,
1895; Cartailhac, _Âges préhist. Esp. et Portug._, p. 305, Paris, 1886;
H. and S. Siret, _Prem. âges du métal dans le sud-est de l’Esp._, 3rd
part (by V. Jacques), Antwerp, 1887.]
[Footnote 359: S. Reinach, “Mirage oriental,” _L’Anthropologie_, 1894,
pp. 539 and 699; A. Evans, “Eastern Question,” _Rep. Brit. Assoc._,
1896, p. 911; Montelius, _loc. cit._; Much, “Die Kupferzeit in Europa,”
Jena, 1893.]
[Footnote 360: A. Evans, _loc. cit._, “Eastern Question”; Sal. Reinach,
_L’Anthropol._, 1893, p. 731; Montelius, “The Tyrrhenians, etc.,”
_Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxvi., 1897, p. 254, pl.; and “Pre-classic
Chronology in Greece,” _ibid._, p. 261.]
[Footnote 361: This term, used first in Germany, is accepted by almost
all men of science. The La Tène period corresponds pretty nearly with
the “_âge Marnien_” of French archæologists and the _late Celtic_ of
English archæologists. Cf. M. Hoernes, _Urgesch. d. Mensch._, chaps.
viii. and ix., Vienna, 1892.]
[Footnote 362: Together with the Sards, the Turses are the only
European peoples of which the Egyptian inscriptions anterior to the
thirteenth century /B.C./ make mention, under the name of
_Shordana_ and _Thursana_ (W. Max Müller, _Europa und Asien_, 1894).]
[Footnote 363: D’Arbois de Jubainville, _Les Anciens Habitants de
l’Europe_, new ed., vol. i., p. 201, Paris.]
[Footnote 364: See for this history, Isaac Taylor, _The Origin of
the Aryans_, chap. i., London, 1890, and S. Reinach, _L’origine des
Aryens_, Paris, 1892.]
[Footnote 365: Th. Poesche, _Die Arier_, Jena, 1878; Penka, _Die
Herkunft der Arier_, Vienna, 1886. This identification has been turned
to account by several men of science, especially by O. Ammon (_loc.
cit._) in Germany and V. de Lapouge (_Sélections sociales_, Paris,
1895) in France, in the construction of somewhat bold sociological
theories.]
[Footnote 366: Osc. Schrader, _Sprachvergl. u. Urgesch._, 2nd ed.,
Jena, 1890.]
[Footnote 367: According to Hirt, “Die Urheimat ... d. Indogermanen,”
_Geogr. Zeitsch._, vol. i., p. 649, Leipzig, 1895, the home of
dispersion of the primitive Aryan language would be found to the north
of the Carpathians, in the Letto-Lithuanian region. From this point
two linguistic streams would start, flowing round the mountains to
the west and east; the western stream, after spreading over Germany
(Teutonic languages), left behind them the Celtic languages in the
upper valley of the Danube, and filtered through on the one side into
Italy (Latin languages), on the other side into Illyria, Albania, and
Greece (Helleno-Illyrian languages). The eastern stream formed the Slav
languages in the plains traversed by the Dnieper, then spread by way of
the Caucasus into Asia (Iranian languages and Sanscrit). In this way we
can account, on the one hand, for the less and less marked relationship
between the different Aryan languages of the present day and the common
primitive dialect, and, on the other hand, the diversity between the
two groups of Aryan languages, western and eastern.]
[Footnote 368: A. Bertrand and S. Reinach, _Les Celtes dans la vallée
du Pô, etc._, Paris, 1894.]
[Footnote 369: D’Arbois de Jubainville, _loc. cit._, vol. ii., p. 297.]
[Footnote 370: For particulars see J. Deniker, “Les Races de l’Europe,”
_Bull. Soc. d’Anthropol._, 1897, pp. 189 and 291; _L’Anthropologie_,
1898, p. 113 (with map); and “Les Races de l’Europe,” first part,
_L’indice Céphal._, Paris, 1899 (coloured map). Cf. Ripley, “Racial
Geography of Europe,” _Appleton’s Popular Science Monthly_, New York,
for the years 1897, 1898, and 1899.]
[Footnote 371: See in Appendices I. to III. the figures relative to the
different populations of Europe, taken from the works referred to by me
in the previous note.]
[Footnote 372: Sergi, _Origine ... Stirpe Mediterranea_, Rome, 1895.]
[Footnote 373: Houzé, “Caract. phys. des races européennes,” _Bull.
Soc. Anthro._, Brussels, vol. ii., 1883, 1st part.]
[Footnote 374: R. Collignon, _Bull. Soc. Anthro._, Paris, 1883, p. 463,
and _L’Anthropologie_, 1890, No. 2.]
[Footnote 375: Ch. de Tourtoulon and Bringuier, “Limite ... de la
langue d’oc, etc.,” _Arch. Miss. Sc. Paris_, 1876. Cf. _Rev. École
Anthr. Paris_, 1891, p. 218.]
[Footnote 376: Province of Namur, nearly the whole of the provinces
of Hainault, Liège, and Luxemburg, as well as the southern part of
Brabant. Cf. Bremer, _Nationalit. und Sprache in Belgien_ (with map),
Stuttgart, 1887.]
[Footnote 377: H. Gaidoz, “Die französisch. Thäler Piemonts,” _Globus_,
p. 59, 1891, with map; Sachier, _Le Français et le Provençal_ (Fr.
trans. by Monet, Paris, 1891).]
[Footnote 378: F. Pullé, “Profilo antr. dell’ Italia,” _Archivo. p.
Antr._, 1898 (with maps).]
[Footnote 379: Dr. N. Manolescu, _Igiena Teranului_ (Hygiene of the
Rumanian peasant, an ethnographical inquiry), Bucharest, 1895; S.
Weigand, _Die Aromunen_, vol. i., Leipzig, 1895 (with plates and maps).]
[Footnote 380: A. J. Ellis, _English Dialects_, London, 1890, two maps;
and other publications of the English Dialect Society (1873-98).]
[Footnote 381: Almost all the two Flanders, the half to the north of
Brabant, the provinces of Antwerp and of Limbourg. Cf. Bremer, _loc.
cit._]
[Footnote 382: R. Andree, “Gränzen Niederd. Sprache,” _Globus_, 1891,
vol. lix., No. 2.]
[Footnote 383: See Langhans, _Deutsch. Kolon. Atlas_, maps Nos. 3 to
7. For a comprehensive view of the Germans generally, see Ranke, _Der
Mensch._, vol. ii. (Somat., Archeol.), and E. H. Meyer, “Deutsche
Volkskunde” (Ethnography, Folk-lore), Strassburg, 1898; for the
Austrians: _Oester.-Ung. Monarchie_, vols. iv. and vi., Vienna,
1886-89; and for the Bavarians, _Beiträge z. Anthr., etc., Bayerns_,
Munich (1876-99).]
[Footnote 384: See for the Slav languages: A. Pypine and Spassovitch,
_Istoria, etc._ (Hist. of Slavonic Literatures), St. Petersburg, 1879,
2 vols., of which there is a translation of the first in French by
S. Denis (1881); for a slight general view: F. von Hellwand, _Die
Welt der Slaven_, Berlin, 1890; Zograf, _Les peuples de la Russie_,
Moscow (1895); and _Oester-Hung. Monarch._, vols. ix., xi., xiv.,
xv. (1891-96); for ethnogeny and archæology: Lubor Niederle, _O
Puvodu Slovanu_ (Origin of the Slavs), Prague, 1897 (in Czech); and
_Cheloviechestvo, etc._ (Prehistoric Man), Russian translation, St.
Petersburg, 1898.]
[Footnote 385: Beddoe, “The Kelts of Ireland,” _Journ. of Anthropol._,
1871, p. 117 (map); Broca, “La Question Celtique,” _Bull. Soc. Anthro.
Paris_, 1873, pp. 313 and 247; Havelock Ellis, “The Men of Cornwall,”
_New Century Review_, 1897, Nos. 4 and 5.]
[Footnote 386: T. Aranzadi, _El pueblo Escalduna_, San Sebastian, 1889
(maps); R. Collignon, “La Race Basque,” _L’Anthropologie_, vol. v.,
1894, p. 276.]
[Footnote 387: _Oester.-Ung. Monarchie_, vols. v., ix., and xii.,
1888-93.]
[Footnote 388: Retzius, _Finska Kranier_, Stockholm, 1878, pl. (with
French summary); see also publications of the Finno-Ugrian Society of
Helsingfors, etc.]
[Footnote 389: S. Sommier, _Un Estate in Siberia_, Florence, 1885;
and _Archivo p. l’Antro._, vols. xvii. and xix. (1887-89); Maïnof,
_Resooltaty_, etc. (_Anthr. and Jurid. Studies of the Mordva_);
“Zapiski,” Russian Geog. Socy. (Ethnog. Sec.), vols. xi. and xiv.
(1883-85); works of Smirnov on the Mordva, Cheremiss, etc., Fr. trans.
by Boyer (Paris, 1897-98).]
[Footnote 390: P. Mantegazza and Sommier, _Studii antr. sui Lapponi_,
Turin, 1880 (phot. pl.); “Notes on the Lapps,” by Prince R. Bonaparte,
Keane, and Garson, _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xv., 1885, pp. 210 _et
seq._; Montefiore, “The Samoyeds,” _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxiv.,
1895, p. 396; Zograf, “Esquisse des Samoyedes,” _Izviestia_ (_Bull._)
_Soc. Friends. Nat. Sc._, Moscow, vol. xxxi., 1878-79, supl. (analysed
in the _Rev. d’Anthr_., 1881); Sommier, _loc. cit._ (analysed _Rev.
d’Ethnogr._), Paris, 1889.]
[Footnote 391: R. Erckert, _Der Kaukasus u. Seine Völker_, Leipzig,
1885 (with map); E. Chantre, _Rech. Anthropol., dans le Caucase_,
Lyons, 1885-87, 4th vol., and atlas; Pantiukhof, “Obser. Anthr. au
Caucase,” _Zapiski Caucasian Sec. of Russ. Geog. Soc._, vol. xv.,
Tiflis, 1893, phot.]
[Footnote 392: For particulars see Deniker, _loc. cit._ (_Races de
l’Europe_).]
[Footnote 393: The flint flakes resembling palæolithic tools, found
by F. Noetling (_Records Geol. Survey, India_, vol. xxvii., p. 101,
Calcutta, 1894) in Miocene or lower Pliocene beds, at Yenang-Yung
(Central Burma), are considered by Oldham and other scholars as natural
products. However, Noetling has since (in 1897) described an animal
bone, artificially polished(?), of the same beds.--_Nat. Science_,
London-New York, 1894, p. 345; 1895, 1st half-year, p. 367; 2nd, pp.
199 and 294; and 1887, 1st half-year, p. 233.]
[Footnote 394: The bones of the _Pithecanthropus_, a thigh-bone, a
calvaria (Figs. 112 and 113), and two molar teeth (Fig. 112), were
found by Dr. Dubois at Trinil (province of Madioun), on the bank of the
river Bengavan, in a layer of lava, by the side of bones of animals of
the Pliocene period. The calvaria, indicating a cranial capacity of
about 900 cubic centimetres, recalls rather the Neanderthal-Spy skull
(Fig. 86) than that of a gibbon; the thigh-bone is entirely human;
the teeth are of a form intermediate between those of Man and of the
Anthropoids.--For particulars see E. Dubois, _Pithecanthropus ... aus
Java_, Batavia, 1894; and his articles in the _Anat. Anzeig._, 1896,
No. 1, and the _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, London, vol. 25, p. 240 (1896);
Manouvrier, Bull. Soc. Anthr., Paris, 1895, pp. 12 and 553; 1896, pp.
396 and 467; G. Schwalbe, _Zeitsch. Morph. u. Anthr._, vol. i., p. 16,
Stuttgart, 1899.]
[Footnote 395: Uvarof, _Arkheologia_, etc. (_Archeol. of Russia_, vol.
i., Moscow, 1881, p. 162, in Russian); Kuznétzof, _Mittheil. Anthr.
Gesell._, Vienna, 1896, Nos. 4 and 5; “Age de la pierre au Japon,”
_Mater. hist.... homme_, Toulouse-Paris, 1879, p. 31; S. Fuse, _Journ.
Anthr. Soc. Tokyo_, vol. xi., 1896, No. 122 (in Japanese); Inuzuka,
_ibid._, No. 119; E. Cartailhac, “L’âge de la pierre en Asie,” _Congr.
Orientalistes_, 3rd ser., 1, p. 315, Lyons, 1880; G. Chauvet, “Age
de la pierre en Asie,” _Congr. intern. arch. prehis._, 11th session,
vol. i., p. 57, Moscow, 1892. The arrows picked up by Abbé A. David in
Mongolia, and supposed to be palæolithic, belong to the historic period
(Hamy, _Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat._, 1896, p. 46).]
[Footnote 396: Medlicot and Blandford, _Manual of Geol. of India_,
Calcutta, 1879, 2 vols.; Cartailhac, _loc. cit._; Rivett-Carnac,
_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xiii., 1884, p. 119.]
[Footnote 397: Potanin, _Otcherki_, etc. (_North-West Mong. Sketches_),
St. Petersburg, 1881-83, 4 vols., (in Russian); Adrianof, “Zapiski,
etc.,” _Mem. Russ. Geog. Soc._, Sect. Gen. Geog., vol. xi., 1888, p.
149; Radloff, _Aus Sibirien_, Leipzig, 1884, 2 vols., and _Arbeit.
Orkhon. Exped._, St. Petersburg, 1893-97 (in course of publication).
For summary of the question and bibliography, see Deniker, _Nouvelles
Geogr._, p. 54, Paris, 1892 (with map).]
[Footnote 398: Radloff, _loc. cit._ (_Arbeit._, etc.); Thomson, _Mem.
Soc. Finno-Ougrienne_ vol. v., Helsingfors, 1896. We cannot admit as a
general rule an exact synchronism between the prehistoric periods of
Europe and those of Northern Asia. If, as Uvarof says, the age of the
mammoth was earlier in Siberia than in Europe, it is none the less true
that many peoples of Eastern Siberia were still in the midst of the
“stone age” at the time when the Russians penetrated into this country
(seventeenth century). As to the peoples of Western Siberia and the
Kirghiz Steppes, the beginning of their bronze age goes back at the
furthest to the beginning of the Christian era.]
[Footnote 399: Margaritof, _Memoirs Amurian Soc. of Naturalists_,
vol. i., Vladivostok, 1887. The only skull found in these heaps is
dolichocephalic and reminds one of the Ainu skull. Thus one might
suppose, as Milne had done (_Trans. As. Soc. Jap._, Tokio, 1899, vol.
vii., p. 61), in connection with the similar kitchen refuse found in
Japan, that they are the work of the Ainus; however, the presence of
pottery, unknown to the Ainus even to recent times, militates against
this view.]
[Footnote 400: The Nagas have still at the present day axes of
precisely the same form, which they use as hoes. (S. Peal, _Journ. As.
Soc. Bengal_, vol. lxv., Part III., p. 9, Calcutta, 1896.) Cf. Noulet,
“Age de la pierre ... au Cambodge d’après Moura,” _Mus. Nat. Hist._,
vol. i., p. 3, Toulouse, 1879; and _Mater. Hist. Nat. Homme_, vol.
xiv., p. 315, Toulouse, 1879; Cartaillac, _L’Anthropol._, p. 64, 1890
(a summary of Jammes’s discoveries).]
[Footnote 401: Schrenck, _Reisen in Amur-Lande_, vol. iii., Parts I.
and II., St. Petersburg, 1881-91.]
[Footnote 402: Müller and Gmelin saw in 1753 the last surviving Arines,
and in 1855 Castren was still able to find five individuals speaking
the Kotte tongue.]
[Footnote 403: Yadrintsef, “Ob Altaïtsakh, etc.” (On the Altaians and
Tatars of Chern), _Izviestia of the Russ. Geogr. Soc._, St. Petersb.,
1881.]
[Footnote 404: Nordenskiold, _Voyage de la Vega_, vol. ii., chap. xii.,
Paris, 1883-84; Deniker, _loc. cit._ (_Rev. Anthr._, p. 309, 1882).]
[Footnote 405: The disappearance of these tribes is more apparent
than real. The Anauls, in the neighbourhood of the Gulf of Anadyr,
exterminated by the Cossacks in 1649, were only a fraction of the
Yukaghirs, as is indicated by the termination “ul” which is found again
in the name “Odul,” which the Yukaghirs use to describe themselves. The
word “Omok” means simply people, “tribe” in Yukaghir language. As to
the Cheliags, who, according to the Cossack Amossof, occupied at the
end of the last century the Siberian coast between the Gulf of Chaun
and the mouth of the Kolima--they were probably one of the Chukchi
tribes.]
[Footnote 406: Iokhelson, “Izviestia, etc.,” _Bull. East-Siberian Sect.
of the Russ. Geogr. Soc._, vol. xxix., p. 8, Irkutsk, 1898.]
[Footnote 407: Anuchin, “Izviestia” _Soc. Friends Sc. Moscow_, suppl.
to vol. xx., 1876 (analysed _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1878, p. 148); Scheube,
_Mitt. Deut. Gesell. Natur. u. Volkenk_, vol. iii., pp. 44 and 220,
Yokohama-Tokio, 1880-82; G. Batchelor, _Trans. As. Soc. Japan_, vol.
x., part 2, Tokio, 1882, and _The Ainu of Japan_, London, 1892;
Chamberlain, _Mem. Imper. Univ. Japan_, Litter. coll. No. 1, Tokio,
1887 (analysed _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1888, p. 81); Tarenetsky, _Mem. Ac.
Sc. St. Petersburg_, 1890, vol. xxxvii., No. 13; Hitchcock, _Rep. U.S.
Nat. Mus. for 1890_, pp. 408 and 429; S. Landor, _Alone with the Hairy
Ainu_, 1893; Koganeï, _Beitr. z. Phys. Anthr. Aino_ (extr. from _Mit.
Med. Fakult._, vols. i. and ii., Tokio, 1893-94).]
[Footnote 408: Schrenck, _loc. cit._; Seeland, _Russiche Rev._, vol.
xi., St. Petersburg, 1882; Deniker, _Les Ghiliaks_, Paris, 1884 (extr.
from _Rev. d’Ethnogr._).]
[Footnote 409: C. Hiekisch, _Die Tungusen_, St. Petersburg, 1879; L.
Schrenck, _loc. cit._; H. James, “A Journey in Manchuria,” _Proc.
Geogr. Soc. London_, 1886, p. 779; D. Pozdniéef, _Opissanie_, etc.
(_Description of Manchuria_, in Russian), vol. i., chap. vi., St.
Petersburg, 1897. For measurements, see Appendices II. and III.]
[Footnote 410: This classification is not at all absolute. Turks and
Mongols inhabit the wooded regions of Northern Asia (Yakuts, Buriats);
they are also to be found in Europe and Asia Minor. The table-land of
Iran, belonging to the region without outlet, assimilated since the
works of Richthofen to Central Asia, is mostly inhabited by Iranian
peoples having a connection with those of anterior Asia. The Thibetans
chiefly occupy the upper valley of the Yaro-tsanpo, which is now in the
line of communication between Central and peripheral Asia, etc.]
[Footnote 411: See my articles “Turks” and “Tatars” in the _Dict.
Univ. de Geogr._ of Vivien de Saint-Martin and Rousselet, vol. vi.,
Paris, 1894; and for details the works of Radloff and Vambery, to which
reference is therein made.]
[Footnote 412: These “Tatars” have sprung from the intermixture of
three elements: the primitive Tatars, the probable descendants of the
_Tu-Kiue_ of Chinese authors, the founders of the kingdom of Sibir
destroyed by the Russians in the sixteenth century; the Sartes and
the Uzbegs, coming especially from Bokhara; lastly, the Tatars of the
Volga, immigrating in the wake of the Russians. In the west of Siberia
there are also Ostiak tribes which bear the name of Tatars (such as
the _Zabolotnyé Tatary_), because they have adopted the customs and
religion of their neighbours the Tatars.]
[Footnote 413: Dutreuil de Rhins and Grenard, _Miss. Sc. Haute Asie_,
vol. ii., Paris, 1898.]
[Footnote 414: See bibliography in the monograph on the Kirghiz-Bukei
by Kharouzin, “_Izviestia_” _Soc. Friends of Nat. Sc._, Moscow, vol.
72, 1891.]
[Footnote 415: We must distinguish among the “Tatars of the Crimea” two
ethnic groups, speaking the same Turkish dialect: the _Tatars of the
Steppes_ (Nogai), and the _Tatars of the Mountains_ and _of the Coast_,
or _Tauridians_ (_Krimchaki_ in Russian). These are the Islamised
descendants of the ancient populations of the Taurus (Kipchaks,
Genoese, Greeks, Goths). The Nogai belong to the Turkish race, more or
less crossed, while the Tauridians have many traits of the Adriatic and
Indo-Afghan races.]
[Footnote 416: For statistics as to stature, ceph. index, etc., see
Appendices I. to III.; these figures are borrowed from the works of
Benzengre, Bogdanof, Chantre, Elissiéef, Erckert, Hecker, Kharuzin,
Lygin, Malief, Merejkovsky, Nazarof, Païssel, Pantiukhof, Sommier,
Ujfalvy, Vyrubof, Weisbach, Weissenberg, Yadrintzef, etc. (Cf. Deniker,
_Les Races de l’Europe_, 1. Ind. ceph., Paris, 1899.)]
[Footnote 417: Pallas, _Samml. Hist. Nachricht._, St. Petersburg,
1776-1801, 2 vols.; Bergmann, _Nomad. Streifereien. u. d. Kalmuk_,
Riga, 1804, 4 vols.; Howorth, _History of Mong._, London, 1877, 4
vols.; Deniker, _loc. cit._ (_Rev. Anthr._, 1883-84); Ivanovsky, _loc.
cit._ (Mongols-Torg.); Potanin, _loc. cit._; A. Pozdniéef, _Mongolia_,
_etc._ (Mongolia and the Mongols, in Russian), St. Petersburg, 1896,
vol. i., and other publications of this learned writer.]
[Footnote 418: In many works to these three divisions of Mongols are
also added the so-called _Hezare_ or _Hazara_ and the _Aimaks_, tribes
styled Mongolian, left by Tamerlane in Afghanistan. It appears that
at the present time these tribes have only preserved of their origin
a few physiognomical features; they speak a Turkish dialect and have
intermixed with the Jemchids, whose mode of life and religion they have
adopted.]
[Footnote 419: Cf. Prjevalsky, _Trétie_, _etc._ (Third Journey in
Central Asia), St. Petersburg, 1883; and _Jour. Geog. Soc._, 1886-87;
Rockhill, _The Land of the Lamas_, London, 1891; _Ethnol. of Tibet_,
Washington, 1895; and _Rep. U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1893_, p. 665;
Desgodins, _Le Tibet_, 2nd ed., Paris, 1885; Waddell, _Buddhism of
Thibet_, London, 1895; and _Among the Himalayas_, London, 1899.]
[Footnote 420: See Dalton, _Descrip. Ethnol. of Bengal_, p. 13 _et
seq._, Calcutta, 1872. We leave untouched the peoples sprung from the
intermixture of the Thibetans with the Mongols (_Kara-Tanguts_ of the
Kuku-Nor), with the Iranians and the Hindus (_Balti_, of Cashmere,
etc.), with the Punjabi Hindus (_Gurkhas_, _Nepalese_), with the Assam
peoples (_Dophlas_, _Miris_, etc.).]
[Footnote 421: Prjevalsky, _loc. cit._; Risley, “Tribes and Castes of
Bengal,” _Anthr. Data_, Calcutta, 1891, 2 vols.; Rockhill, _loc. cit._;
Dutreuil de Rhins, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 422: Fr. Garnier, _Voyage ... en Indo-Chine_, Paris, 1873,
vol. i., p. 519, and vol. ii., p. 32 (_Memoir of Thorel_).]
[Footnote 423: Colb. Baber, “Travels ... in West China,” _Supp. Pap.
Geogr. Soc._, vol. i., London, 1882; Colquhoun, _Across Chryse_,
London, 1883, vol. ii., Appendix.]
[Footnote 424: Roux, _Le Tour du Monde_, 1897, 1st half, p. 254. The
adorning of the body and limbs with rings, so characteristic of the
Dyaks and other Indonesians, is also found among the Lu-tse; they
wear around the loins and limbs numerous iron wire rings coated with
black wax and fastened together in two places with metal rings. Great
phalanstery-like houses, 40 metres long, similar to those of certain
Indonesians and Polynesians, and used by several families, in which men
and women sleep promiscuously, are met with among the western _Kew-tse_
on the boundary of their country with the _Khamti_ (see p. 40).]
[Footnote 425: Terrien de Lacouperie, _The Languages of China before
the Chinese_, p. 92, London, 1887; Fr. Garnier, _loc. cit._; H. Hallet,
_Proc. Geogr. Soc._, p. 1, London, 1886 (with map).]
[Footnote 426: See the summary of the data in this respect in
Richthofen, _China_, vol. i., Berlin, 1875, and in Reclus, _Geogr.
Univ._, vol. vi., Paris, 1882.]
[Footnote 427: See in the appendices the statistics of stature, ceph.
index, etc., from the works of Girard, Hagen, Janka, Poyarkof, Ten
Kate, Weisbach, Zaborowski, and my own observations.]
[Footnote 428: Note also the inferior position of woman, her ability to
move about limited by deformation of the feet (p. 175).]
[Footnote 429: The exact figures for the height of Coreans are
contradictory: Dr. Koïke (_Internat. Arch. Ethnogr._, vol. iv.,
Leyden, 1891, Parts I. and II.) gives the excessively high stature of
1 m. 79 as the average of seventy-five men measured; while Elissiéef
(“_Izviestia_” _Russ. Geogr. Soc._, St. Petersburg, 1890) found 1 m. 62
the average height, but according to the measurements of ten men only.]
[Footnote 430: W. Carles, _Life in Corea_, London, 1888; Gottsche,
“Land. u. Leute in Korea,” _Verh. Ges. Erdk._, p. 245, Berlin, 1886;
A. Cavendish and Goold-Adams, _Korea_, London, 1894; Pogio, _Korea_,
trans. from the Russian, Vienna and Leipzig, 1895; L. Chastaing, “Les
Coréens,” _Rev. Scientif._, p. 494, 1896, second half-year; Maurice
Courant, _Bibliogr. Coréenne_, Introduc., vol. i., Paris, 1895; and
_Transact. As. Soc. Japan_, vol. xxiii., p. 5.]
[Footnote 431: See Appendices I. and III. for the measurements given
from Miss Ayrton, Bälz, Koganei, etc.]
[Footnote 432: It might be supposed that the representatives of the
first type were the descendants of tribes who had come by way of Corea
and the Tsu-shima and Iki-shima islands in the south-west of Nippon
at some period unknown, but at any rate very remote. As to the coarse
type, its representatives are perhaps descended from the warriors
who invaded about the seventh century /B.C./ (according to a
doubtful chronology) the west coast of the island of Kiu-siu and then
Nippon. These invaders, intermixing with the aborigines of unknown
stock, founded the kingdom of Yamato, and drove back the Ainus towards
the north (see p. 372).]
[Footnote 433: The ancient practice of suicide in case of injury
(_Harakiri_), now abolished, also denoted great courage; sometimes it
was a disguised form of vendetta, for the relatives of the suicide were
bound in honour to exterminate the offender.]
[Footnote 434: Mohnike, _Die Japaner_, Münster, 1872; Bälz, _loc.
cit._; J. J. Rein, _Japan_, Leipzig, 1881-86, 2 vols.; Mechnikof,
_L’empire Japonais_, Paris-Geneva, 1882; B. Chamberlain, _Things
Japanese_, Yokohama, 1891; “Tokyo Jinruigaku,” etc. (_Journ. Anthr.
Soc. Tokio_, in Japanese), 1888-98.]
[Footnote 435: Dodd, _Jour. Str. Br. As. Soc._, No. 15, p. 69,
Singapore, 1885; I. Ino, “Distrib. géog. tribu. Formose,” _Tokyo
Jinruigaku_, p. 301, 1898 (analysed in _l’Anthropologie_,1899);
Imbault-Huart, _L’île de Formose_, Paris, 1893; A. Wirth, “Eingeborn.
Stämme auf Formosa u. Liu-Kiu,” _Peterm. Mitt._, p. 33, 1898.]
[Footnote 436: Dourisboure, _Les Sauv. Ba-Hnars_, Paris, 1873; Neïs,
_Excurs. et Reconn._, Saigon, Nos. 6 (1880), 10 (1881), and _Bull.
Soc. Géogr._, p. 372, Paris, 1884; Harmand, _loc. cit._, and _Tour du
Monde_, 1879 and 1880; Pinabel, _Bull. Soc. Géogr._, p. 417, Paris,
1884.]
[Footnote 437: Aymonier, “Voyage dans le Laos,” _Ann. Mus. Guimet_.
(Bibl. d’Étude, vol. v.), vol. i., p. 38, Paris, 1895; Harmand, _loc.
cit._]
[Footnote 438: E. Kuhn, _Sitzungsberichte, Phil.-hist. Kl. Bayer. Akad.
Wiss._, p. 289, Munich, 1889.]
[Footnote 439: Aymonier, _Excurs. et Reconn._, Saigon, Nos. 8 and 10
(1881), 24 (1885), chap. viii., No. 32 (1890), and _Rev. d’Ethnogr._,
1885, p. 158; Bergaigne, _Journ. Asiat._, 8th series, vol. xi., 1888;
Maurel, _Mem. Soc. Anthr._, 1893, vol. iv., p. 486.]
[Footnote 440: Mrs. Mason, _Civilising Mountain Men_, etc., London,
1862, and other works of this author. Smeaton, _The Loyal Karen_, etc.,
London, 1886.]
[Footnote 441: There exists among them a strange custom: the men
experience great pleasure in putting into their mouths and then
spitting out the juice from the narghiles smoked by the wives. The
offer of _tobacco juice_ is one of the first duties of hospitality.]
[Footnote 442: J. Butler, “Angami Nagas,” _Jour. As. Soc. Bengal_,
vol. xliv., p. 216, Calcutta, 1875; Woodthorpe, “Notes ... Naga
Hills,” _Jour. Anthro. Inst._, vols. ix. (1882) and xix. (1890); Reid,
_Chin-Lushai Land_, Calcutta, 1893; Peal, “Naga,” _Jour. Anthr. Inst._,
vol. iii., 1874, p. 476; _Nature_, 20th May 1897; _Jour. As. Soc.
Bengal_, vol. lxv., part 3, p. 17, Calcutta, 1897; and “Ein Ausflug,
etc.,” _Zeit. f. Ethn._, 1898, p. 281 (trans. by Klemm, with notes and
bibliog.); Miss Godden, “Naga, etc.,” _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vols. xxvi.
and xxvii. (1896-97).]
[Footnote 443: J. Anderson, _The Selungs_, Lond., 1890; Lapicque,
_Bull. Soc. Anthr._, 1894, p. 221, and “A la rech. des Negritos,” _Le
Tour du Monde_, 1895, 2nd half-year, and 1896, 1st half-year; Man,
_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xiv., 1886, p. 428; Roepstorff, _Zeitschr.
f. Ethnol._, 1882, p. 51.]
[Footnote 444: Man, “Aborig. Andam. Isl.,” _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vol.
xi., 1882; De Quatrefages, _Les Pygmées_, Paris, 1887; Lapicque, _loc.
cit._, and “La race Negrito,” _Ann. de Geogr._, No. 22, Paris, 1896.]
[Footnote 445: Moura, _Royaume de Cambodge_, Paris, 1883, 2 vols.;
Aymonier, _Géographie du Cambodge_, Saigon-Paris, 1876; L. Fournereau
and Porcher, _Les Ruins d’Angkor_, etc., Paris, 1890; Morel, _Mém. Soc.
Anthr._, vol. iv., Paris, 1893.]
[Footnote 446: Deniker and Laloy, “Races exot.,” _L’Anthropologie_,
1890, p. 523.]
[Footnote 447: Risley, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 448: Terrien de Lacouperie, _loc. cit._; Colquhoun, _loc.
cit._, Appendix and Preface by T. de Lacouperie; Bourne, _Parliam.
Pap._, C., 5371, London, 1888; C. Baber, _loc. cit._; Hosie, _Three
Years’ Jour. in Western China_, London, 1890; Labarth, “Les Muongs,”
_Bull. Soc. Géogr. hist. et descr._, Paris, 1886, p. 127; H. Hollet,
_loc. cit._; Aymonier, _loc. cit._, ch. vii; Billet, “Deux ans dans
le Haut Tonkin,” _Bull. Scient. de la France et de la Belgique_, vol.
xxviii., Paris, 1896-98; Deblenne, _Mission Lyonnaise en Chine_, p. 34,
Lyons, 1898.]
[Footnote 449: From Dr. Girard, quoted by Billet, _loc. cit._, p. 69.]
[Footnote 450: Harmand, _loc. cit._; Aymonier, _loc. cit._ (Voyage au
Laos).]
[Footnote 451: The so-called primitive division into four castes:
Brahmans (priests), Kshatriya (soldiers), Vaisyas (husbandmen and
merchants), and Sudra (common people, outcasts, subject peoples?),
mentioned in the later texts of the _Vedas_, is rather an indication
of the division into three principal classes of the ruling race as
opposed, in a homogeneous whole, to the conquered aboriginal race
(fourth caste).]
[Footnote 452: Sénart, “Les Castes dans l’Inde,” _Ann. Mus. Guimet.,
Bibl. de Vulgar_, Paris, 1896 (sums up the question). To the
bibliographic references to castes which are found in this excellent
book must be added the “Introduction” to the work of W. Crooke, already
quoted; it appeared subsequently.]
[Footnote 453: The ingenious deductions of Risley (_loc. cit._,
_Ethnogr. Glossary_, vol. i., Preface, p. 34, Calcutta, 1892), which
may be summed up in the aphorism, “The nasal index increases in a
direct ratio to the social inferiority of the caste,” have been
criticised by Crooke (_loc. cit._, p. 119), who however is too absolute
in his statements, and does not take any account of the seriation of
anthropometric measurements.]
[Footnote 454: E. Schmidt, “Die Anthrop. Indiens,” _Globus_, vol. lxi.
(1892), Nos. 2 and 3. For the measurements of the different peoples of
India see Appendices I. to III.; the figures are chiefly borrowed from
Risley, _loc. cit._, Crooke, _loc. cit._, Jagor, Thurston, _loc. cit._,
Sarasin, _loc. cit._, E. Schmidt, _loc. cit._, Deschamps, _Au pays des
Veddas_, Paris, 1892, with pl.]
[Footnote 455: Jellinghaus, “Sagen, Sitten ... der Munda-Kolhs,” _Zeit.
f. Ethn._, vol. iii., 1872, p. 328; Dalton, _loc. cit._, p. 150;
Risley, _loc. cit._, _Ethnogr. Glossary_; Crooke, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 456: The word Ho (Hor or Horo), which recurs in the name of
all these tribes, signifies everywhere “man,” and indicates their close
linguistic relationship; their manners and customs are also alike,
especially in regard to the constitution of the community. Religion
among them all is an animism blended with very vague polytheism. In
their physical characters there are some differences; the Munda and the
Bhumij are short (1 m. 59) and very dolichocephalic (ceph. ind. on the
liv. sub. 74.5 and 75), the Santals are below the average height (1 m.
61) and a little less dolichocephalic (76.1). The _Ho_, among whom we
may assume a greater infusion of Indo-Afghan blood, are of somewhat
high stature (1 m. 68). The number of these four tribes, united under
the name of Santals in the census of 1891, amounted to a million and a
half.]
[Footnote 457: Ball, _Jungle Life in India_, p. 267; Fawcet, “The
Saoras of Madras,” _Journ. Ant. Soc. Bombay_, vol. i., 1888, p. 206; E.
Dalton, _loc. cit._, p. 149.]
[Footnote 458: They must not be confused with the _Mal-Paharia_, who
dwell farther to the south in the same district of Santhal Parganos
(Bengal), and whose affinities are still obscure; from the somatic
point of view there is, however, hardly any difference between the two
groups.]
[Footnote 459: They must not be confounded with the _Kharwar_ or
_Kharvar_, Dravidians of Chota Nagpur, the southern parts of Behar and
Mirzapur; these are half-civilised husbandmen, having a particular
social organisation. Their higher castes have an infusion of Hindu
blood, while the type of the lower castes recalls that of the Santals.
The _Kûrs_ of the Mahadeva hills are closely allied to the Kharwar.]
[Footnote 460: Cf. Shortt, _Account of the Tribes of the Nilghiris_,
1868; Marshall, _A Phrenologist among the Toda_, London, 1873; Elie
Reclus, _Primitive Folk_, ch. v.; Thurston, _Madras Gov. Museum
Bullet._, vol. i., No. 1, and vol. ii., No. 4; G. Oppert, _The Original
Inhabitants of India_, London, 1894, and _Zeit. f. Ethnol._, 1896, pt.
5.]
[Footnote 461: The name _Rajputs_ is only honorary, and is attached to
a crowd of tribes and castes varying in origin, in mode of life, and in
dress. The Jats of the Punjab, of which the Sikhs are only a section,
are constituted of a mixture of strongly differentiated populations.]
[Footnote 462: Risley, _loc. cit._; Crooke, _loc. cit._; Fonseca
Cardoso, “O indigena de Satory,” _Revista de Scien. Naturæs_, vol. iv.,
No. 16, Oporto, 1896.]
[Footnote 463: Biddulph, _Tribes of the Hindoo-Koosh_, Calcutta, 1880;
De Ujfalvy, _Aus dem Westl. Himalaya_, Leipzig, 1884; Leitner, _The
Hunza and Nagar Handbook_, London, 1893; Capus, _Manuscript Notes_;
Risley, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 464: The brother of the dead husband may marry all the
latter’s widows, and none of them has the right to marry again without
the consent of her brother-in-law. There is no term in the Chin and
Yeshkhun languages to denote nephews and nieces--they are called “sons
or daughters”; aunts on the maternal side are called “mothers.”]
[Footnote 465: De Ujfalvy, “Les Koulou,” _Bull. Soc. Anthr._, 1882, p.
217; Forsyth, _Yarkand Mission_, Calcutta, 1875; S. Mateer, _Native
Life in Travancore_, London, 1883; Elie Reclus, _loc. cit._, p. 143
(Nairs); E. Schmidt, “Die Naïrs,” _Globus_, vol. lxviii. (1895), No.
22; Waddell, _loc. cit._ (_Am. Himal._), chap. ix.]
[Footnote 466: Sarasin, _loc. cit._, gives bibliog.; Deschamps,
_Ceylan_, _loc. cit._ For the measurements of these peoples, see the
Appendices I. and II.]
[Footnote 467: The Hajemis of the Caspian littoral are called more
particularly _Talych_ and _Mazandarani_.]
[Footnote 468: The interminglings with the Turks must be of recent
date; for if we may still discuss the “Turanian” characters of the
Sumero-Acadian _language_, there is no indication of the existence
of the _Turkish race_ in Asia Minor in ancient times. The famous
sculptured head of Tello (in the Louvre) has a false Turkish air, owing
to the head-dress and the broken nose; three other statuettes from the
same locality, preserved at Paris, have a fine and prominent nose and
meeting eyebrows: Assyroid characters (see De Clercq, _Album des Antiq.
de la Chaldée_, Paris, 1889-91; Maspero, _Hist. des peupl. Orient.
Class._, vol. i., p. 613, Paris, 1895; and E. de Sarzec, _Découvertes
en Chaldée_, published by Heuzey, Paris, 1885-97).]
[Footnote 469: D. Menant, “Les Parsis,” _Ann. Mus. Guin., Bibl. Et._,
vol. vii., Paris.]
[Footnote 470: E. Oliver, _Across the Border, Pathan and Biloch_,
London, 1890.]
[Footnote 471: For the measurements of the Iranians see Appendices I.
to III. (from Danilof, Houssey, Ujfalvy, Bogdanof, Chantre, Troll,
Risley).]
[Footnote 472: Möckler, “Origin of Baluch,” _Proc. As. Soc. Bengal_,
1893, p. 159.]
[Footnote 473: Chantre, _Rech. Anthr. As. Occid. Transcaucasie, Asie
Min. et Syrie_, Lyons, 1895 (with pl. and fig.); and “Les Kurdes,”
_Bull. Soc. Anthr. Lyons_, 1897. The Lurs of Western Persia living
south of the Kurds are akin to the latter; they may be divided
into Luri-Kuchucks (250,000) or little Lurs in Luristan, and into
Luri-Buzury, farther south, in Hazistan, a part of Fars. Their best
known tribes are those of the _Bakhtyari_ and _Maamaseni_. The Lurs
are above the average height (1 m. 68), and sub-brachycephalic (ceph.
ind. 84.5), according to Houssay, Duhousset, and Gautier. Cf. Houssay,
“Les Peuples de la Perse,” _Bull. Soc. Anthr. Lyons_, 1887, p. 101; and
Pantiukhof, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 474: The Arab tongue of the present day includes three
dialects: _Western_, extending from Morocco to Tunis; _Central_, spoken
in Egypt; and _Eastern_, spoken in Arabia and Syria.]
[Footnote 475: Petersen and Von Luschan, _Reisen in Lykien, etc._,
chap, xiii., Vienna, 1889; Chantre, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 476: It is known, in fact, that the isolation of the Jews
from the rest of the population is not always absolutely complete.
There have been peoples of other races converted to Judaism: the
Khasars in the seventh century, the Abyssinians (present _Falacha_),
the Tamuls or “black Jews” (p. 115, note), the Tauridians of the
_Karaite_ sect, etc. (p. 222). Cf. J. Jacobs, “Racial Charact....
Jews,” _Journ. Anth. Inst._, vol. xv. (1885-86), p. 24; and Jacobs and
Spielmann, _ibid._, vol. xix. (1889-90).]
[Footnote 477: The Aissors or Chaldeans who migrated to the Caucasus
are probably allied to these “Jews of the mountains”; they are also
very brachycephalic (ceph. ind. 88) and of rather high stature (1 m.
67) (Erckert, Chantre).]
[Footnote 478: See the art. “Juifs” in the _Dict. Géog. Univers._ of
Vivien de Saint-Martin and Rousselet, vol. ii., Paris, 1884 (with
bibliog.); Andree, _Zur Völkerkunde der Juden_, Bielefeld, 1881, with
map; and publications of the _Soc. des Études Juives_, Paris. The
measurements given in the Appendices are after Ikof, Chantre, Jacobs
and Spielmann, Gluck, Kopenicki, Weissenberg, Weisbach, etc.]
[Footnote 479: See my art. “Tsiganes,” in the _Dict. Géog. Univ._,
quoted above, vol. vi., 1893; Paspati, _Étude sur les Tchinghiané_,
Constantinople, 1870; A. Colocci, _Gli Zingari_, Turin, 1889, with map;
H. von Wlislocki, _Vom ... Zigeuner-Volke_, Hamburg, 1890; and the
publications of the Gypsy-Lore Society, London (1886-96).]
[Footnote 480: Fl. Petrie and Quibell, _Nagada and Ballas_, London,
1896; De Morgan, _Recherches sur les Origines de l’Egypte_, Paris,
1897-98, 2 vols. See for summary of the question: S. Reinach,
_L’Anthropol._, 1897, p. 322; and J. Capart, _Rev. Université_,
Brussels, 4th year (1898-99), p. 105. Let us remember while on this
point that at the quaternary period lower Egypt was still covered by
the sea, and that the climate of Egypt and the Sahara was much more
humid than to-day (Shirmer, _Le Sahara_, p. 136, Paris, 1893). Most of
the prehistoric finds in Egypt have been made on the table-lands, not
covered by the alluvial soils of the Nile.]
[Footnote 481: W. Gooch, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xi. (1882), p.
124; Seton Karr, “Discov. of Evid. Paleolith. Age in Somaliland,”
_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxv. (1896), p. 271; X. Stainier, “L’âge de
la pierre au Congo,” _Annales Mus. du Congo_, 3rd series (Anthr.), vol.
i., part 1, Brussels, 1899 (with plates).]
[Footnote 482: R. Collignon, “Les âges de la pierre en Tunisie,”
_Mater. Hist. Nat. Homme_, 3rd series, vol. iv., Toulouse, 1887;
Couillault, “Station préhist. Gafsa,” _L’Anthropologie_, vol. v., 1894,
p. 530; Zaborowski, “Period néolith. Afr. du nord,” _Rev. Ec. Anthr._,
Paris, 1899, p. 41.]
[Footnote 483: See for details, R. Andree, “Steinzeit Afrikas,”
_Globus_, vol. xli. (1882), p. 169; and X. Stainier, _loc. cit._, p.
18.]
[Footnote 484: Recent discoveries of stone objects in Egypt have
revived the question of Asiatic or European influence in Africa. While
Flinders Petrie, De Morgan, and others suppose that Petrie’s “new race”
of the neolithic period which preceded Egyptian civilisation in the
Nile valley is related to the Libyans coming from the north-west of
Africa, and perhaps from Europe, Schweinfurth (_Zeitsh. f. Ethnol._,
1897; _Verhandl._, p. 263) thinks that these neolithic people were
immigrants from Arabia (Semites?), who had come into the Nile valley
from the south, through Nubia. The recent discovery of chipped flints
in the country of the Somalis, as well as considerations of a botanic
character, confirm this supposition, without excluding, however, the
possibility of the arrival of the Libyans of the north-west in the
palæolithic period, and the tribes of Syria and Mesopotamia in historic
times. (Evidence: the “Hyksos” of the Egyptian annals, the presence of
cuneiform tablets at Tel-el-Amarna, upper Egypt, to which attention was
drawn by Sayce, etc.)]
[Footnote 485: Barthel, “Völkerbewegungen ... Afrikan. Kontin.,”
_Mittheil. Verein Erdkunde_, Leipzig, 1893, with map.]
[Footnote 486: Jews and Maltese on the coast of the Mediterranean;
Persians and Hindus on the east coast and the islands off it; a few
hundred Chinese introduced into the Congo State and the Mauritius and
Réunion islands. Among the Europeans, the _Boers_ of Cape Colony,
of the basin of the Orange river, and the Transvaal, as well as the
Portuguese of Angola and Mozambique, are more or less intermingled with
the natives. The English of the Cape, and the French of Algeria-Tunis,
and the “Creoles” of the island of Réunion have kept themselves
more free from intermixture. Finally, let us note the Spanish of
Algeria-Morocco and the Canary Isles, the latter the hybrid descendants
of the prehistoric Guanches, which are perhaps connected with the
European Cro-Magnon race. (See S. Berthelot, “Les Guanches,” _Mem. Soc.
Ethnol._, Paris, vols. i. and ii., 1841-45; Verneau, _Iles Canaries_,
Paris, 1891.)]
[Footnote 487: Hartmann, “Les Peuples de l’Afrique,” Paris, 1880
(_Bibl. Internat._), a work written from a different standpoint from
the present chapter.]
[Footnote 488: See for details, Hanoteau and Letourneux, _La Kabylie_,
etc., Paris, 1872-73; Quedenfeld, “Berberbevölkerung in Marokko,”
_Zeits. f. Ethn._, vol. xx.-xxi., 1888-89; Topinard, “Les types de
... l’Algérie,” _Bull. Soc. Anthr. Paris_, 1881; Villot, _Mœurs,
coutumes ... des indig. de l’Algérie_, Algiers, 1888; Ch. Amat, “Les
Beni-Mzab,” _Rev. Anthr._, 1884, p. 644.]
[Footnote 489: Collignon, “Ethn. gén. de la Tunisie,” _Bull. Géogr.
hist. et descr._, Paris, 1887. Cf. Bertholon, “La population de la
Tunisie,” _Rev. gén. des Sc._, Paris, 1896, p. 972 (with fig.).]
[Footnote 490: It is to be noted that these last belong, like the
islanders of Djerba, to the _Ibadite_ sect, an offshoot of orthodox
Islamism.]
[Footnote 491: Duveyrier, _Les Touareg du Nord_, Paris, 1864; Schirmer,
_loc. cit._]
[Footnote 492: Rohlfs, _Quer durch Africa_, vol. i., Leipzig, 1888.]
[Footnote 493: Faidherbe, “Les Berbers ... du Sénégal,” _Bull. Soc.
Anthr. Paris_, 1864, p. 89; R. Collignon and Deniker, “Les Maures du
Sénégal,” _L’Anthropologie_, 1895, p. 287.]
[Footnote 494: According to the best preserved monuments, the ancient
Egyptians had a brownish-reddish complexion of skin, long face, pointed
chin, scant beard, straight or aquiline nose like the Ethiopian race
(see p. 288). The hair of the mummies makes us think of the black and
frizzy hair of the Ethiopians themselves. Lastly, the few ancient
Egyptian skulls examined are meso- or dolicho-cephalic. See Pruner-Bey,
_Mem. Soc. Anthr. Paris_, vol. i., 1863; Hartman, _Zeits. für Ethnol._,
vols. i. and ii., 1869-70, and _Die Nigritier_, Berlin, 1876; E.
Schmidt, _Arch. f. Anthr._, vol. xvii., 1888; S. Poole, _Journ. Anthr.
Inst._, vol. xvi., 1886, p. 371; S. Bertin, _ibid._, 1889, vol.
xviii., p. 104; _Phot. Coll._, Flinders Petrie (Brit. Assoc. 1887);
Sergi, _Africa Antropol. della stirpe camitica_, Turin, 1897. Virchow
(_Sitzungsb. Preuss Akad. Wiss._, 1888) has endeavoured to show that
the most ancient type of the Egyptians was brachycephalic, but his
deductions are disputable, being based on measurements of statues.]
[Footnote 495: Sometimes the Barabras are also similarly designated, in
my opinion wrongly, for this leads to a triple confusion, “Nuba” being
still the name of a Negro tribe (see p. 444). It would be more correct
to employ this term as a synonym of _Northern Ethiopian_; besides,
according to Strabo (Book XVII.), Eratosthenes refers to the “Nubians”
in his time as a people distinct from the Negroes and Egyptians. The
Barabras are not so dark, have not such frizzy hair, and are not so
tall as the Bejas, the Hamrans, and other Ethiopians their neighbours,
and consequently belong, not only by their language, but also by their
physical type, to the Arabo-Berber group.]
[Footnote 496: For general works see Paulitschke, _Beiträge Ethnogr. u.
Anthr. d. Somâl. Galla_, Leipzig, 1886, and _Ethnogr. Nordost Africas_,
Berlin, 1893-96, 2 vols.; Sergi, _loc. cit._ (_Africa_).]
[Footnote 497: Hartmann, “Die Bedjah,” _Zeit. f. Ethnol._, vol. xi.,
1879, p. 117; Virchow, _Zeit. f. Ethn._, vol. x., 1878 (Verh. p. 333,
etc.), and vol. xi., 1879 (Verh. p. 389); Deniker, _Bull. Soc. Anthr.
Paris_, 1880, p. 594.]
[Footnote 498: Révoil, _La Vallée du Darrar_, Paris, 1882; Paulitschke,
_loc. cit._; Sergi, _loc. cit._, p. 178; Santelli, _Bull. Soc. Anthr.
Paris_, 1893, p. 479.]
[Footnote 499: See Appendices I. to III. for the measurements given
from the works already quoted of Deniker, Paulitschke, Santelli, Sergi,
and Virchow.]
[Footnote 500: J. Thomson, _Through Masai Land_, 2nd ed., London, 1887;
Stuhlmann, _Mit Emin Pascha ins Herz von Afrika_, Berlin, 1894; F. von
Luschan, _Beitr. zur Völkerk. d. Deutsch. Schulzgebiet_, Berlin, 1897,
with meas. and phot.]
[Footnote 501: W. Junker, _Reisen in Afrika_, Vienna and Olmütz,
1889-91; and _Ergänzungsh. Peter. Mit._, Nos. 92 and 93, Gotha,
1888-89.]
[Footnote 502: Schweinfurth, “Die Monbuttu,” _Zeits. f. Ethn._, 1873,
p. 1, and _Artes Africanæ_, Leipzig, 1875; Junker, _loc. cit._; P.
Comte, _Les N’Sakkaras_, Bar-le-Duc, 1895.]
[Footnote 503: See Schweinfurth, _loc. cit._ (_Artes Africanæ_), and
_The Heart of Africa_, 2nd ed., London, 1878; Junker, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 504: Crampel, _Le Tour du Monde_, 1890, 2nd half-year, p. 1;
Dybowski, _La Route du Tchad_, Paris, 1893; Maistre, _De l’Oubanghi à
la Bénoué_, Paris, 1895.]
[Footnote 505: Béranger-Féraud, _Peuples de la Senagambie_, chap, iii.,
Paris, 1879; and the works of Faidherbe, Binger, Tautin, P. C. Meyer,
quoted later.]
[Footnote 506: Stature, 1 m. 75; ceph. ind., 74.3; nas. ind., 95.3
(Collignon and Deniker on 32 subjects).]
[Footnote 507: It follows from what has been said previously that in
many places the northern portion of the Negro territory is invaded by
the Ethiopians, the Fulah-Zandeh, and the Arabo-Berbers.]
[Footnote 508: Nachtigal, _Sahara et Soudan_, vol. i. (trans. into
French), p. 245, Paris, 1881.]
[Footnote 509: Nachtigal, _Sahara und Sudan_, Berlin-Leipzig, 1879-89,
3 vols.]
[Footnote 510: Schweinfurth, _loc. cit._, vol. i., chaps. vii.
and lciv.; Stuhlmann, _loc. cit._, chap. xxii.; Frobenius, _Die
Heiden-Neger_, Berlin, 1893; E. de Martonne, _Annales de Géogr._,
Paris, 1896, p. 506, and 1897, p. 57.]
[Footnote 511: Nachtigal, _loc. cit._; Barth, _Reisen ... in Nord u.
Centr. Afr._, Gotha, 1857-58, 5 vols.; Monteil, _De Saint-Louis à
Tripoli_, Paris, 1895; Maistre, _loc. cit._; Staudinger, _Im Herzen der
Haussaländer_, Berlin, 1889, 2 vols.]
[Footnote 512: The Diumma or Diammo, to the north-east of the bend of
the Black Volta, are probably a branch of the Gurunga; only having for
long been subject to the Ashantis they have adopted their language,
which is the only one they use in addressing strangers. (Binger, _Du
Niger au golfe de Guinée_, Paris, 1892.)]
[Footnote 513: Béranger-Féraud, _loc. cit._, ch. v., and _Rev. Anthr._,
1874, p. 444; Binger, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 514: Faidherbe, “Les Sarakolés,” _Rev. de Linguist._, 1881,
p. 80.]
[Footnote 515: For details see C. Madrolle, _En Guinée_, Paris, 1895.]
[Footnote 516: They must not be confounded with the Diula of the
regions of Kong and the upper Niger, one of the first Mandénké tribes
converted to Islamism, at the same time one of the least fanatic,
perhaps because the most given to trade. (See M. Monnier, _loc. cit._)]
[Footnote 517: Coffinières de Nordeck, _Tour du Monde_, vol. li., p.
273, 1886.]
[Footnote 518: Binger, _loc. cit._; Tautin, “Les Castes des
Mandingues,” _Rev. Ethnogr._, vol. iii., Paris, 1884.]
[Footnote 519: For details in regard to the Wolofs, the Toucouleur,
etc., see Béranger-Féraud, _loc. cit._, chap. i., and _Rev. Anthr._,
1875; Tautin, “Études ... ethnol. peuples Senegal,” _Rev. Ethnogr._,
1885; Deniker and Laloy, _loc. cit._, p. 259; Collignon and Deniker,
unpublished notes; Verneau, “Serer, Leybou, Ouolofs,” _L’Anthropol._,
1895, p. 510.]
[Footnote 520: Deniker and Laloy, _loc. cit._; Ten Kate and Serrurier,
_Musée Ethnogr. Leyden, Notices Anth._, No. I., undated (1891?), in
fol.]
[Footnote 521: Buttikofer, _Reisebilder aus Liberia_, vol. ii., Leyden,
1890.]
[Footnote 522: Fleuriot de Langle, _Le Tour du Monde_, 1873, 2nd
half-year; Binger, _loc. cit._, 2nd vol.; Delafosse, “Les Agni,”
_L’Anthropologie_, 1893, p. 403.]
[Footnote 523: Ellis, _The Tshi-speaking Peoples, etc._, London, 1887,
and _The Ewe-speaking Peoples, etc._, London, 1890; Foa, _Le Dahomey_,
Paris, 1895; D’Albecca, _Le Tour du Monde_, Feb. 1896; F. von Luschan,
_loc. cit._ (_Beitr. Deutsch. Schützg...._).]
[Footnote 524: Rev. Dennis Kemp, _Nine Years on the Gold Coast_,
London, 1898.]
[Footnote 525: The name Mina was applied in Brazil without distinction
to all Negroes imported from the Slave Coast, while those from the
Gold Coast were called Apollonians. Batty, “Yorouba Country,” _Journ.
Anthro. Inst._, vol. ix. (1890), p. 160; Moloney, _ibid._, p. 213;
Ellis, The _Yoruba-speaking Peoples_, London, 1894.]
[Footnote 526: Deniker, “Les Dahoméens,” _Rev. gén. Sciences_, 1891, p.
174; Deniker and Laloy, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 527: See, about these populations, the 1st Appendix, by Comte
de Cardi, in _West Afric. Stud._, by Miss M. Kingsley, London, 1899.]
[Footnote 528: Schweinfurth, _loc. cit._; Stanley, _In Darkest
Africa_, London, 1890; Wolff, _Zeit. f. Ethn._, 1886 (Verh., p. 25);
De Quatrefages, _loc. cit._ (_Les Pygmées_), p. 253; De Quatrefages
and Hamy, _Cran. Ethn._, p. 334; Falkenstein, _Zeit. f. Ethn._, 1877
(Verh., p. 194 and pl. xii.-xiv.); W. Flower, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._,
vol. xviii. (1889), p. 3; Deniker and Laloy, _loc. cit._, p. 288; Emin
Bey (afterwards Pasha), “Sur les Akka, etc.,” _Zeit. f. Ethn._, 1886,
p. 145; Junker, _loc. cit._; Nebout, _Tour du Monde_, 1892, vol. i., p.
64; Crampel, “Les Bayagas,” _Compte rend. Soc. Geogr._, Paris, 1890, p.
548; O. Lenz, _Ueber Zwergvölker Afr._, Vienna, 1894; Deniker, _Bull.
Soc. Anthr._, 1894, p. 440; Dybowski, _La Nature_, 1894, 2nd half-year;
Stuhlmann, _loc. cit._, pl. xvi.-xvii., p. 436; Schlichter, “Pygmy of
Africa,” _Scot. Geog. Mag._, 1892, p. 289, and _Peterm. Mitteil._,
1896, p. 235; Donaldson Smith, _Geog. Journ._, London, 1896, pp. 225
and 235; Burrows, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 529: Schinz, _loc. cit._; Emin, _loc. cit._; Wissmann, Wolff,
Von François, and Müller, _Im Innern. Afrik._, Leipzig, 1888, Appendix
IV., and _Zeit. f. Ethn._, 1884, Verh., p. 725.]
[Footnote 530: Dybowski, _loc. cit._; Maistre, _loc. cit._; Clozel,
_Tour du Monde_, 1896, vol. ii.; Guiral, _Le Congo Français_, Paris,
1889; Deniker and Laloy, _loc. cit._, p. 274; Buchner, _Kamerun_,
Leipzig, 1887; Morgen, _Durch Kamerun_, Leipzig, 1893; Zintgraff,
_Nord-Kamerun_, Berlin, 1895, and “Congo-Völk.,” _Z. f. Ethn._, 1886,
Verh., p. 27, and 1889, p. 90; F. von Luschan, _loc. cit._ (_Beitr._,
etc.); V. Jacques, “Le Congolais de l’expos. d’Anvers,” _Bull. Soc.
Anthr._, p. 284, Brussels, 1894; J. Wauters, _L’État Indép. du Congo_,
Brussels, 1899; Mensé, “Völk. Mittl. Kongo,” _Z. f. Ethn._, 1897,
Verh., p. 624.]
[Footnote 531: The Oshyeba are a section of the Fan people; they may
be divided into _Makima_ (in the Upper Ogowe) and into _Mazuna_ (of
the Gabun). They are a people of famous warriors, composed of 200,000
individuals, which number is increasing with extraordinary rapidity.]
[Footnote 532: A. Bastian, _Zeilschr. f. Ethnol._, vol. vi., 1874; E.
Reclus, _Geogr. Univers._, vol. xiii., p. 125, Paris, 1888.]
[Footnote 533: It is supposed that the Bubangis arrived at the north of
French Congo about the eighteenth century, and their migration towards
the south, stayed for the time being by the Batekes, has gone on to the
present day.]
[Footnote 534: Pogge, _Im Reiche d. Muata Jamwo_, Berlin, 1880,
and _Mittheil. Afrik. Gesell._, vol. iv., 1883-85, p. 179; Wolff,
_Verh. Gesell. Erdkunde_, Berlin, 1887, No. 2; A. J. Wauters, _L’État
independant du Congo_, Brussels, 1899, p. 257 _et seq._; Serpa Pinto,
_How I Crossed Africa_, 2 vols., London, 1881, with figs.; Wissmann,
Wolff, Von François, and Müller, _Im Inneren Afrikas_, Leipzig, 1888,
with figs.; Jacques, _Les Congolais_.]
[Footnote 535: L. Frobenius (_Der Ursprung der Afrik. Kulturen_,
Berlin, 1898) sees in this last-cited fact a proof of the supposed
influence of the Malays; E. Reclus (_Geogr. Univers._, vol. xiii., p.
271) regards it as the result of imitation of the European factories
which have been established for three centuries on the coast.]
[Footnote 536: The prefix _Ki_ means “language,” as _U_ means
“country,” and _Va-Ua_, or _Ba_, “people,” or “men.”]
[Footnote 537: Fritsch, _Die Eingeborenen Sud-Afrikas_, Breslau,
1872, with atlas; Holub, _Sieben Jahre in Sud-Afrika_, Vienna, 1881,
vol. ii., figs. and maps, and “Die Matabele,” _Zeitschr. f. Ethnol._,
vol. xx., 1893; Kropf, _Das Volk d. Xosa-Kaffern_, Berlin, 1889;
Wood, _loc. cit._, vol. i.; Macdonald, “Manners ... South-African
Tribes,” _Journ. Anth. Inst._, vol. xix., p. 264, and vol. xx., p. 123
(1889-90); Johnston, _British Central Africa_, London, 1897; Junod,
“Les Ba-Ronga,” _Bull. Soc. Neuchateloise de Géogr._, vol. x., 1898.]
[Footnote 538: The Bechuana are a little shorter (1 m. 68, according
to Fritsch) and more dolichocephalic (ceph. ind. of four skulls, 70.9,
according to Hamy, “Documents Cafrerie,” _Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat._, p.
357, Paris, 1882). Shrubsall (_Journ. Anth. Inst._, N.S., vol. i.,
1898) gives the ceph. index as 71.3 for the Basuto skulls. The Herrero
and Damara skulls have the indices, 71 and 72.]
[Footnote 539: Fritsch, _loc. cit._; Schinz, _loc. cit._; Von Luschan,
_loc. cit._]
[Footnote 540: The Bushmen represent the race almost in its purity,
while the Hottentots show the traits of this race somewhat modified.
The stature of the latter is higher, the head more dolichocephalic, the
complexion darker, and the hands are not so small as is the case with
Bushmen. Their features are more negroid, and it has been suggested
that contact with the neighbouring Bantu tribes has had something to do
with this. (See Deniker, “Les Hottentots,” _Rev. d’Anthrop._, 1889, p.
1.) The skin of the Hottentots, however, is still of a hue of yellow,
and their steatopygy is almost as pronounced as with the Bushmen.]
[Footnote 541: For particulars see Sibree, _Great Afric. Island
... Madagascar_, 1880; M. Leclerc, “Les peuplades de Madagascar,”
_Rev. d’Ethnogr._, vol. v., 1886, p. 397, and vol. vi., 1887, p. 1;
Catat, _Voyage à Madagascar_, Paris, 1895, in quarto; Grandidier,
“Les Hovas,” _Rev. gén. des Sciences_, No. for 1st June, 1895; A.
Jolly, _L’Anthropologie_, 1894, p. 385; Besson, _ibid._, p. 674; “Le
Madagascar,” _Rev. gén. des Sciences_, Paris, No. for 15th Aug., 1895,
fig.; Last, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, 1896, p. 47; Bouchereau, _L’Anthr._,
1897, p. 149; J. Carol, _Chez les Hovas_, Paris, 1898.]
[Footnote 542: The prefix _Antan_ or _Anta_ (in some dialects _Ta_) in
Malagasy language means “people of,” and is found in the nomenclature
of all the tribes and people of the island.]
[Footnote 543: See the measurements given in Appendices I. to
III., according to Bouchereau, _loc. cit._, and my own unpublished
observations made in conjunction with Dr. Collignon.]
[Footnote 544: For particulars see C. Pleyte, “De prähist. steenen
wapenen ... Oost-Indish. Archipel.,” _Bijdr. t. d. Taal-Land-en
Volkenk. van Nederl. Ind._, Batavia, 5th series, vol. ii., p. 586;
Wilken, _loc. cit._, p. 83; Etheridge, “Has Man a Geological History
in Australia?”_ Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales_, 1890, p. 259; B. Smyth,
_loc. cit._, vol. i., p. 239, and vol. ii., p. 234; R. Chapmann,
_Trans. N. Zeal. Inst._, 1891, p. 479.]
[Footnote 545: See W. Thomson Smith, _loc. cit._; Tautain, “Monuments
des Marquises,” _L’Anthropol._, 1897, p. 4; F. Christian, “On
Micronesian Weapons,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, N.S., 1899, vol. i., p.
288, pl. xx. and xxiv.]
[Footnote 546: Besides, the Maoris of New Zealand know nothing
of pottery, notwithstanding their clay deposits, nor of weaving,
notwithstanding the presence in their island of _Formium_ and other
textile plants.]
[Footnote 547: The division, based on physical characters, of tribes of
the interior, composed of a strong people of high stature and regular
features, and of tribes of the coast, formed of a little, ugly, and
puny people, a division proposed by Topinard (_Bull. Soc. Anthro._,
1872), has not been confirmed by later investigations.]
[Footnote 548: “Report ... Horn Scientif. Exped. Centr. Austr.,” Part
IV., _Anthropology_, by E. Stirling, London-Melbourne, 1896; Baldwin
Spencer and F. Gillen, _The Native Tribes of Central Australia_,
London, 1899, pl.; W. E. Roth, _Ethnol. Stud.... N. W. Centr. Queensl.
Aborig._, Brisbane-London, 1897. For tribes of the east and south, see
E. Curr, _The Australian Race_, Melbourne, 1886, 3 vols. with atlas;
Lumholtz, _Among Cannibals_, London, 1890; and the works already
quoted of Howitt, Fison, and B. Smyth. The measurements given in the
Appendices are obtained from the works of Stirling and Gillen, Houzé
(_Bull. Soc. Anthr. Bruxelles_, vol. iii., 1884-85); Cauvin, “Les Races
de l’Océanie,” _Arch. Miss. Scient._, 3rd series, vol. iii., Paris,
1882; Topinard, _loc. cit._; Turner, _loc. cit._, etc.]
[Footnote 549: These natives and mixed breeds are apportioned by
colonies, thus:--Victoria, 565; New South Wales, 8,280; South
Australia, 23,789; West Australia, 6,245; Queensland, 20,585 (of which
12,000 are pure aborigines).]
[Footnote 550: See L. Parker, _Australian Legendary Tales_, London and
Melbourne, 1897, and _More Australian Tales_, _ib._, 1898; Spencer and
Gillen, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 551: Estimated at 1000 in 1817, the Tasmanians numbered 340
in 1824 (first census). The number fell to 111 in 1834, to 51 in 1842,
to 16 in 1854, to 4 in 1865 (H. Hull, _Statist. Summary of Tasmanians_,
1866). The last representative of the Tasmanian people, a woman called
Truganina, died in 1876. Miss F. C. Smith, still living, and described
as a Tasmanian, in 1889, is a Tasmano-European half-breed (Ling Roth,
_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxvii., p. 451, 1897-98).]
[Footnote 552: In his work, _The Aborigines of Tasmania_, 2nd ed.,
London, 1899, with figs., Ling Roth has conscientiously summarised all
that has been published about the Tasmanians.]
[Footnote 553: There is no justification for supposing that the Kalangs
of Java are Negritoes, as A. R. Meyer has assumed in his memoir
(_Leopoldina_, part xiii., Nos. 13-14, 1877). See on this point,
Kohlbrugge, “L’Anthr. des Tenggerois,” _L’Anthropologie_, p. 4, 1898.]
[Footnote 554: See Montano, “Mission aux Philippines,” _Arch.
Miss. Scient._, 3rd series, vol. xi., with figs., Paris, 1885; De
Quatrefages, _loc. cit._ (_Les Pygmées_); Schadenberg, _Zeitschr. f.
Ethnol._, 1880.]
[Footnote 555: Ten Kate, “L’Anthropologie d’Oceanie,”_
L’Anthropologie_, vol. iv., 1893, p. 279; “Verslag eener Reis in
Timorgrœp,” _Tijdschr. Nederl. Aardrijk. sk. Genoot._, Amsterdam,
vol. xi., 1894, with summary in French; and _Anthropol. Problem in
Insulindie ... Festbundel ... Dr. P. Veth aangeboden_, p. 212, Leyden,
1894; Lapicque, _loc. cit._ (_Tour du Monde_).]
[Footnote 556: Modigliani, _loc. cit._, and _L’isola delle Donne
... Engano_, Milan, 1894; Danielli, “Cranii di Engano,” _Archiv. p.
l’anthr._, vol. xxiv. See also the works already quoted of Montano,
Hagen (as well as his _Anthropolog. Atlas Ostasiat.... Völk._,
Wiesbaden, 1898), Ten Kate, Deniker and Laloy, Lapicque, Kohlbrugge,
etc.]
[Footnote 557: Junghuhn, _Battaländer auf Sumatra_, vol. ii., p. 375;
Hamy, “Les Alfourous de Gilolo,” _Bull. Soc. Geogr. Paris_, 6th ser.,
vol. xiii., p. 490.]
[Footnote 558: The dwellings in trees at Sumbawa, among the Mandayas
of Mindanao (Philippines), among the Lubu of Sumatra, should also be
noted.]
[Footnote 559: Pleytte, “De Geogr. Otbreiding v. h. Koppensnellen,
etc.,” _Tijdschr. v. h. Aardrijksk. Genoots_, p. 908, Amsterdam, 1891.]
[Footnote 560: For the anthropometry of some of the peoples enumerated
below, see Appendices I. to III. The figures there given are derived
from the works of Hagan, Ten Kate, Lapicque, Deniker and Laloy,
Kohlbrugge, Jacobs, Weisbach, Lubbers and Langen.]
[Footnote 561: See J. Jacobs, _De Badoejs_, S’Gravenhage, 1891, and
Kohlbrugge, _loc. cit._, and “De heilige bekers d. Tenegerezen,”
_Tijdschr. v. Ind. Taal-Land-in Volkenk_, vol. xxxiv., 1896. Among the
Tenggerese some vestiges of Buddhism may be discovered.]
[Footnote 562: See Ling Roth, _The Natives of Sarawak_, 2 vols.,
London, 1896, and _Jour. Anthr. Inst._, vols. xxi. and xxii. (1892-93).]
[Footnote 563: Blumentritt, “Versuch. einer Ethnographie der
Philip.,” _Ergänzungsheft, Peterm. Mitteil._, No. 67, Gotha,
1887, with map; Montano, _loc. cit._; Virchow, “Die Bevölker. d.
Philip.,” _Sitzungsber. Berlin Acad. Wiss._, 1897, p. 279, and 1899,
p. 14; Brinton, “The Peoples of Philip.” (short summary), _Amer.
Anthropologist_, October, 1898.]
[Footnote 564: For the populations of Celebes, Timur, Floris, etc.,
see Max Weber, _Tijdsch. Aardrijksk. Genoots._, 2nd ser., vol. vii.,
Amsterdam, 1890, and _Inter. Arch. Ethnogr._, suppl. to vol. iii.,
Leyden, 1890, pl.; Brothers Sarasin, _Verh. Ges. Erdk. Berlin_,
1894, 1895, and 1896; Ten Kate, “Reis in de Timor groep,” _Tijd.
Aardr. Genoot._, 2nd ser., vol. xi., p. 199, Amsterdam, 1894, and_
L’Anthropologie_, 1893, p. 279; Lapicque, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 565: See my summary of what was known of the Papuans in
1882 in the _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1883, p. 484, and the following works
which have since appeared: Chalmers, _Pioneering in New Guinea_,
London, 1887, and other works; De Clercq and Schmeltz, _Ethnogr.
Beschrijving van de W. en N. Nederl. New Guin._, Leyden, 1893; Finsch,
_Samoafahrten_, Leipzig, 1888, and his articles in the _Ann. naturh.
Hofmus._, Vienna, 1888 and 1891, in the _Rev. d’Ethnogr._, 1886, etc.;
Haddon, “Decorat. art Brit. N. Guin.,” _Cunningham Memoirs_, vol. x.,
_Roy. Irish Acad._, 1894; and “The Ethnography of Brit. New Guinea,”
_Science Progress_, vol. ii., 1894, pp. 83 and 227, London, with map
and bibliog.; Macgregor, _Proc. R. Geogr. Soc._, 1890, p. 191, and his
official reports; Thomson, _Brit. New Guinea_, London, 1892.]
[Footnote 566: It is also to be noted that the supposed
Papuan-Polynesian cross-breeds of the south-east of New Guinea neither
drink kava nor know the art of pottery, unlike true Polynesians.
Besides, their language approximates more nearly to the Melanesian
dialects and presents no affinities with Polynesian languages (Ray,
“Languages of Brit. N. Guinea,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxiv., p.
15, 1894).]
[Footnote 567: Papuan skulls are generally very dolichocephalic (av.
ceph. ind. 73), and the presence of brachycephalic skulls in the
series of New Guinea origin is certainly of significance, only their
proportion is very slight. Out of 500 New Guinea skulls described I
have been able to find only 36 brachycephalic, or seven per cent. More
than half of these skulls come from one and the same locality, the
Kiwai and Canoe Islands in the delta of the Fly. Either a Malay colony
may therefore be assumed there, a remnant of Negritoes, or that it was
a centre of the custom of deforming the head, a custom which in fact
obtains in the neighbourhood of the mouth of the Fly. On this question
see my summary of 1882 cited above, and Haddon, _loc. cit._; Schellong,
“Anthr. d. Papus,” _Zeit. f. Ethn._, p. 156, 1891; J. Chalmers,
“Anthropometr. observ., etc.,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxvii.
(1897).]
[Footnote 568: The Kerepunu are good agriculturists; their mode of
working is quite remarkable (Fig. 152). The soil is turned up at the
word of command by a row of men, each of whom thrusts into the earth
two pointed sticks, then using these sticks as levers a layer of earth
is raised and a furrow is thus made.]
[Footnote 569: Hamy, “Papous de la mer d’Entrecasteaux,” _Rev.
Ethnog._, 1889.]
[Footnote 570: Haddon, _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xix., p. 297; S. Ray
and Haddon, “Languages of Torres Straits,” _Proceed. R. Irish Acad._,
3rd ser., vol. iv., 1897; Rev. Hunt, _Journ. Anthr.... Inst._, N.S.,
vol. i., p. 5, 1898-99.]
[Footnote 571: R. Codrington, _The Melanesians_, Oxford, 1891, fig.;
Finsch, _loc. cit._, _Rev. Ethnogr._, 1883, p. 49, and _Anthrop. Ergeb.
einer Reise in der Sudsee_, Berlin, 1884, with fig.; Flower, “Cran.
caract. Fiji Islanders,” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. x., 1881, p. 153;
Hagen and Pineau, “Les Nouvelles-Hébrides,” _Rev. Ethnogr._, 1888, p.
302; Guppy, _The Solomon Islands and their Natives_, London, 1887;
Hagen, “Les Indigènes des Salomon,” _L’Anthropol._, 1893, pp. 1 and
192; Aug. Bernard, _La Nouvelle Caledonie_ (thesis), p. 249 _et seq._,
Paris, 1894; Luschan, _loc. cit._; Schellong, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 572: The number of Polynesians (2,310 in 1897) has diminished
by half in the Fijis since 1881, while that of the natives (100,321 in
1897) has hardly varied. The Polynesian element is appreciable in the
Aoba, Tanna, and Espiritu Santo islands of the New Hebrides, but its
importance has been exaggerated so far as the Loyalty Islands and New
Caledonia are concerned (see my note in the _Bull. Soc. Anthr._, p.
791, 1893).]
[Footnote 573: Ellis, _Polynesian Researches_, 4 vols., London, 1853;
Tautain, “Les Marquisiens,” _L’Anthropologie_, 1894, 1895, and 1898;
Meinecke, _Die Inselen des stillen Oceans_, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1875;
Markuse, _Die Hawaischen Inselen_, Berlin, 1894; Lister, “Natives of
Fakaofu (Bowditch Island),” _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, vol. xxi., 1892,
p. 43; Ch. Hedley, “The Atoll of Fanafuti, Ellice group,” _Australian
Museum, Memoir III._, Sydney, 1897; H. Gros, “Les populations de la
Polynesie française en 1891,” _Bull. Soc. Anthr. Paris_, 1896, p. 144;
Ten Kate, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 574: Kubary, _loc. cit._, and _Journ. Mus. Godeffroy_, parts
2 and 4, 1873.]
[Footnote 575: De Quatrefages, _Les Polynesiens et leurs migrations_,
Paris, 1866, with maps.]
[Footnote 576: A. Bernard, _loc. cit._, p. 272.]
[Footnote 577: Sittig, “Unfreiwillige Wanderungen ...,” _Peterm.
Mittheil._, p. 61, 1890.]
[Footnote 578: A. von Humboldt, in his _Évaluation numérique de la
population du Nouveau Continent_, Paris, 1825, reckoned that in the
Americas there were 13 millions of Whites, 6 millions of Half-breeds,
6 millions of Negroes, and 9 millions of Indians; three-quarters of a
century later (in 1895-97) it was computed that there were 80 millions
of Whites, 37 millions of Half-breeds, 10 millions of Negroes and 10
millions of Indians in a total population of 137 millions (1897).]
[Footnote 579: Williams, _Hist. of the Negro Race in America_, 2 vols.,
New York, 1885; B. A. Gould, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 580: The celebrated skull discovered by Whitney in the
auriferous sands of Calaveras (California), which has been said to
belong to the pliocene age, has been disputed both as regards its
authenticity and the supposed date of its bed; and it is the same with
the pestles and mortars discovered in the same neighbourhood by such
geologists as Skertchly and C. King (cf. W. Holmes, “Prelim. Revis.
Evidence to Aurif. Gravel Man in Calif.,” _Am. Anthropologist_, N.S.,
vol. i., Nos. 1 and 2, New York, 1899). The imprints of human feet, or
rather of moccasins, discovered at Carson (Nevada), even granted that
they are authentic, have in any case been found in beds whose period is
by no means tertiary.]
[Footnote 581: At this period Greenland, all Canada, a corner of
Alaska, and a good part of the United States were covered with glaciers
almost uninterruptedly. The limit of the moraine to the south may be
indicated by a line which, leaving New York, for Lake Erie, would
follow the course of the Ohio as far as the region of its junction with
the Mississippi, and would be continued along or a little to the west
and to the south of the Missouri to coincide then with the Canadian
frontier. The fauna of the American quaternary period differed somewhat
from that of Europe: the _Rhinoceros tichorhinus_, for instance, was
missing, while the _Mastodon ohioticus_ and several large edentata,
such as the _Megatherium_, _Mylodon_, etc., are met with.]
[Footnote 582: See for details, Abbott, _Primitive Industry_, Cambridge
(Mass.), 1881, and _Evidence ... Antiquity of Man in East N. America_,
1888; F. Wright, _The Ice Age in North America_, New York, 1889,
chaps. xxi. and xxii., and _Meet. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sc. of Buffalo_,
1896; Geikie, _loc. cit._ (chap. li., written by T. Chamberlin); Metz,
_Proceed. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist._, vol. xxiii., p. 242; W. Upham,
_ibid._, p. 436; Hille-Cresson, _Proceed. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist._, 1889;
Holmes, _loc. cit._ (_Fifteenth Rep. Bur. Ethn._); Th. Wilson, _A Study
of Prehist. Anthrop._, Washington, 1890 (Extract from _Rep. U.S. Nat.
Mus._, 1887-88, p. 597). For the discussion, see _Science_ for 1892
and 1898. Marcellin Boule has summarised most of the works quoted, and
shows the present state of the question in _Revue d’Anthropologie_,
1888, p. 647, and in _L’Anthropologie_, 1890 and 1892; see also
Nadaillac, _L’Anthropologie_, 1897 and 1898. I will merely note that
the tendency of surface objects to sink towards deep beds, brought
forward by the opponents of Abbott, Wright, etc., altogether fails to
explain why _other_ implements (in flint, jade, etc.) or pieces of
pottery have not similarly been carried down, and that only argilite
tools are found _flat_ in deep beds.]
[Footnote 583: Hamy, “Anthropologie du Mexique,” _Miss. scientifique du
Mexique_ (_Rech. zool._, 1st part), p. 11, Paris, 1884.]
[Footnote 584: S. Herrera, _Proceed. Am. Ass. Adv. Sc._, Madison, 1893,
pp. 42 and 312; Th. Wilson, _loc. cit._; De Nadaillac,_ L’Amerique
préhistorique_, Paris, 1883, and _Revue d’Anthropol._, 1879 and 1880.]
[Footnote 585: Ameghino, _La Antiguedad del hombre en El Plata_,
Paris-Buenos-Ayres, 1880, 2 vols.]
[Footnote 586: De Quatrefages, “L’homme foss. de Lagoa-Santa,”
_Izviestia Soc. of Friends of Nat. Sc._, Moscow, vol. xxxv., 1879;
Sören Hansen and Lutken, _Lagoa Santa Racen_, Copenhagen, 1889, extract
from _E Museo Lundii_, vol. iv.; Hyades and Deniker, _loc. cit._, p.
163.]
[Footnote 587: Lacerda and Peixoto, “Contribuições ... raças indig.
do Brasil,” Archiv. do Mus. nac., Rio-de-Janeiro, vol. i., 1876, and
_Mem. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris, 2nd ser., vol. ii., 1875-82, p. 535; H.
von Ihering, “A civilisaçao prehist. de Brazil merid.,” _Revista do
Museu-Paulista_, vol. i., p. 95, S. Paulo, 1895.]
[Footnote 588: Moreno, “Cimet. et paraderos prehist., etc.,” _Rev.
Anthrop._, 1874, p. 72; Verneau, “Crânes préhist. de Patagonie,”
_L’Anthropol._, 1894, p. 420.]
[Footnote 589: E. Schmidt, _Die Vorgeschichte Nord-Amerikas_,
Brunswick, 1894; cf. _Arch. f. Anthrop._, vol. xxiii., 1894. For
details see Cyrus Thomas, “Burial Mounds,” _Fifth Ann. Rep. Bur.
Ethn._, Washington, 1887 and “Rep. Mound Explorat.,” _Twelfth Rep.
Bur. Ethn. for 1890-91_, Washington, 1894; Carr, “Crania from Stone
Graves, etc.,” _Eleventh Rep. Peabody Mus._; Hale, “Indian Migration,
etc.,” _Amer. Antiquar._, 1883; Shepherd, _Antiquities of State
Ohio_, Cincinnati, 1890; Brinton, _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 90,
Philadelphia, 1890.]
[Footnote 590: The northern zone, circumscribing the great lakes, is
characterised by monuments of rude form; the southern zone, between the
Gulf of Mexico and the basin of the Ohio, is distinguished by mounds
in the form of a truncated pyramid; while the middle zone, that of
the basin of the Ohio, presents a large number of mounds of peculiar
and very perfected types. In each of these zones special regions may
be distinguished, characterised by the shape of the mounds and by the
nature of the objects immured in them.]
[Footnote 591: Cushing, _C. R. Congr. Internat. des Americanistes_, p.
150, Berlin, 1888; V. Mindeleff, “Pueblo Architecture,” _Eighth Report
Bur. Ethnol. for 1886-87_, p. 1, Washington, 1891-93; C. Mindeleff,
“Casa Grande Ruin,” _Thirteenth Report Bur. Ethn. for 1891-92_,
Washington, 1894; Nordenskiold and Retzius, _The Cliff-Dwellers_, etc.,
Stockholm, 1893, in fol. L. Morgan has sought to show in his monograph,
“Houses and House Life of Am. Aborigines,” _Contrib. N. Amer. Ethn._,
vol. iv, Washington, 1881, that the phalanstery-houses were the
typical form of dwelling-place all of the North, and some of the South
Americans, in association with the communal organisation of the tribes.]
[Footnote 592: I have always maintained this opinion, which is amply
confirmed to-day by the investigations made by Ten Kate (“Somatol.
Observ. Ind. South-west,” _Journ. Amer. Ethnol._, vol. iii., p. 122,
Cambridge, Mass., and _Rev. d’Anthrop._, 1887, p. 48), from Canada to
the Pampas. As to South America, the prevalent yellow colouring has
been further noticed by A. von Humboldt, and recently confirmed by
Ranke (_Zeitsch. f. Ethnol._, 1898, p. 61).]
[Footnote 593: Gatschet, “Klamath Indians,” _Contrib. N. A. Ethnol._,
vol. ii., Part I., p. 43, Washington, 1890; D. Brinton, _The American
Race_, p. 57, New York, 1891; Ehrenreich, _loc. cit._]
[Footnote 594: D. Brinton, “Certain Morph. Traits of Am. Languages,”
_Amer. Antiquarian_, November, 1894.]
[Footnote 595: Powell, “Indian Linguist. Families, etc.,” _Seventh Rep.
Bur. Ethn. for 1885-86_, Washington, 1891 (92), p. 1 (with map).]
[Footnote 596: A curious fact is brought out by the study of the
linguistic chart published by Powell: that most of the families of
different languages are grouped in the western, mountainous part of
North America. Thus, out of 59 linguistic families, 40 are found in the
limited area between the Pacific and the Rocky Mountains, while all the
rest of the continent is divided among 19 linguistic families only.
The same fact is observed in South America. We can reduce to a dozen
groups the languages of the Atlantic slope of this continent, while in
the Andes and on the Pacific slope an enormous number of linguistic
families have been noted without any apparent common connection.]
[Footnote 597: E. Petitot, _Monogr. Esquim. Tchiglit du Mackenzie_,
Paris, 1876, 4to; Dall, “Tribes of ... extr. North-West,” _Contrib. to
North Amer. Ethnol._, vol. i, p. 1, Washington, 1877; Ray, _Intern.
Polar Exped. Point Barrow_, Washington, 1888; Sören Hansen, _loc.
cit._, and “Ost Grönl. Anthropol.,” _Meddel om Groenland_, vol. x.;
Boas, “The Central Eskimo,” _Sixth Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._, 1888, p. 409;
G. Holm, _loc. cit._; Rink, “The Eskimo Tribes,” _Meddelel. om Grönl._,
vol. xi., and other works by this author in Danish, quoted by Bahnson,
_Ethnographien_, vol. i., p. 223, Copenhagen, 1894; F. Nansen, _Eskimo
Life_, London, 2nd edit., 1894, figs.; Dix Bolles, _Catal. Eskimo
Collect. Rep. U.S. Nation. Mus. for 1887_, p. 335; R. Peary, _Northward
over the Great Ice_, 2 vols., New York, 1898.]
[Footnote 598: The most northern point now inhabited by the Eskimo is
situated on the Greenland side of Smith’s Sound, 78° 8´ N. lat. (see
the description of this tribe of 2,344 persons in Peary, _loc. cit._,
vol. i., p. 479); but Greely found traces of the permanent settlement
of this people near Fort Conger, in Greenland, 81° 44´ N. lat. The
most southern point occupied by the Eskimo is Hamilton Inlet (55° N.
lat.) in Labrador, but it is not long since they reached as far as the
straits of Belle-Isle in Newfoundland and even farther south, to the
estuary of the St. Lawrence (50° N. lat.).]
[Footnote 599: A great change in the habits of the Eskimo of Alaska
will be effected by the introduction of reindeer, through the agency of
the United States Government (see Jackson, _Rep. Introd. Reindeer in
Alaska_, Washington, 1894 and 1895).]
[Footnote 600: Erman, “Ethnol. Wahrnem Behring Meeres,” _Zeitsch. für
Ethnol._, vol. iii., pp. 159 and 205; Dall, _Alaska, etc._, London,
1870; Bancroft, _Native Races Pacif. St. of America_, Washington, vol.
i., 1875-76, pp. 87 and 111, and 1882, p. 562.]
[Footnote 601: Brinton, _loc. cit._ (_Amer. Race_); Schoolcraft, _loc.
cit._; Powell, _loc. cit._ (_Ind. Ling. Fam._); Catlin, _Letters and
Notes N. Amer. Ind._, London, 1844 (cf. _Report U.S. Nation. Mus._,
1885).]
[Footnote 602: Ten Kate, _Bull. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris, 1884, p. 551,
and 1885, p. 241.]
[Footnote 603: According to Powell, _Smiths. Rep._, 1895, p. 658,
the Atlantic slope may be divided into four provinces: _Algonquian_,
_Iroquoian_, that of the _southern part of the United States_
(Muskhogean), and that of the _plains of the Great West_. The Pacific
slope is split up in its turn into five provinces: North Pacific,
Columbia, Interior Basin, California-Oregon, and the Pueblos region
which encroaches upon Mexico.]
[Footnote 604: The “Pueblos,” Zuñis, Moquis, etc., from whom
these Athapascans have conquered their territory, are short and
brachycephalic. Interminglings have modified only the form of the
head of the Southern Athapascans; but it must be remembered that the
practice of deforming the skull prevails among them.]
[Footnote 605: There are some Apache tribes in Mexico, the _Lipans_,
the _Jarros_, but their numerical force is not known.]
[Footnote 606: See J. Stevenson, “Navajo Ceremonial,” _Eighth Rep. Bur.
Ethnol._, and articles by Matthews on the Navajos in the 2nd, 3rd, and
5th Reports of the _Bur. Ethnol._; Ten Kate, _Reizen en Ondezokongei
in N. Amer._, Leyden, 1885; cf. _Bull. Soc. Anthropol._, 1883, and
“Somatol. Observ. Ind. South-west,” _Journ. Amer. Ethnol._, vol. iii.,
Cambridge, 1891.]
[Footnote 607: Lloyd, “On the Beothucs,” _Journ. Anthropol. Inst. Great
Britain_, vols. iv. and v. (1874-75); and Gatschet, _Proc. Am. Philos.
Soc._, 1885-86, and 1890.]
[Footnote 608: H. Hale, “The Iroquois Book of Rites,” No. 2 of the
_Library of Aborig. Amer. Lit._ of Brinton, Philad., 1883, chaps. i.
and ii. (history of the confederation summarised from the standard
works of Morgan, Colden, etc.); C. Royce, “The Cherokee Nation, etc.,”
_Fifth Rep. Bur. Ethn. for 1883-84_; Mooney, “Sacred Formulæ of
Cherokee,” _Seventh Rep. Bur. Ethn. for 1885-86_.]
[Footnote 609: The primitive population of Florida, the _Timuquanans_,
appear to have been exterminated in the eighteenth century. See
MacCauley, “The Seminol Ind.,” _Fifth Rep. Bur. Ethn. for 1883-84_, p.
467, Washington, 1887.]
[Footnote 610: R. Rigges, “Dictionary ... and Ethnogr. of Dakota,”
_Contrib. N. Amer. Ethn._, vol. viii.; Dorsey, “Furniture and
Implements of Omaha,” _Thirteenth Rep. Bur. Ethn._; “Omaha Sociology,”
_Third Rep. Bur. Ethn._; Mooney, “Siouan Tribes of the East,” _Bull.
Bur. of Ethn._, No. 24, Washington, 1894.]
[Footnote 611: See Appendices I. to III.; the measurements there given
are principally taken from Boas, Ten Kate, the American military
commission, and my own observations with Laloy.]
[Footnote 612: Not less than 39 linguistic families may be enumerated
on that long but narrow strip of land which extends from Alaska to
California, between the Rocky Mountains and the ocean. (Powell, _loc.
cit._)]
[Footnote 613: The Moquis and Zuñis are in fact 1 m. 62 in height,
and have a ceph. ind. of 83.3 and 84.9. We must, however, notice
some exceptions in regard to the somatic type of the Indians of the
Pacific slopes: the _Salishans_ of the coast (with the exception of
the Bilcoolas) are almost short and brachycephalic, while those of the
interior are almost tall and brachycephalic, like the _Bilcoolas_, the
_Maricopas_, the _Mohares_ (Fig. 4).]
[Footnote 614: The first of these groups occupies Powell’s North
Pacific and Columbian “ethnographic provinces” (_loc. cit._); the
second, the province of Oregon-California; the third, the Interior
Basin and the region of the Pueblos.]
[Footnote 615: Gibbs, “Tribes of W. Washington and N.-W. Oregon,”
_Contrib. N. Am. Ethn._, vol. i., p. 157, Washington, 1887; Dall,
“Tribes N.W. Washington,” _ibid._; Petroff, _Rep. on Populat.... of
Alaska_, Washington, 1884; _Amerikas Nordwesküste_ (Publ. Ethn. Mus.),
Berlin, 1883-84, 2 vols., fol.; Krause, _Die Tlinkit Indianer_, Jena,
1885; “Reports ... Committee, North-West Tribes ... Canada” (in the
_Rep. Brit. Assoc._ from 1885 to 1898; especially the reports by H.
Hale and Wilson on the Black-Feet in 1885 and 1887, and the full
reports of Boas, 1888 to 1890, and in 1898, partly summarised in
_Peterm. Mittheil._, 1887 and 1896, and in the _Transact. Roy. Soc.
Canada_, 1888, 2nd sect.); Boas, “Die Tsimshian,” _Zeitsch. f. Ethn._,
1888, p. 231; Niblack, “Coast Ind. South Alaska and N. Brit. Colomb.,”
_Rep. U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1898_.]
[Footnote 616: Bancroft, _loc. cit._, vol. iii.; Ten Kate, _Bull. Soc.
Anthrop._, Paris, 1884, and _loc. cit._; Deniker, _Bull. du Museum
d’Hist. Nat._, 1895, No. 2.]
[Footnote 617: The Shoshones, who inhabited by themselves the _interior
basin_ between the Rocky Mountains and the Sierra-Nevada, have now
dwindled to 17,000 individuals, just managing to subsist by fishing
and gathering roots on infertile soil. They are composed of twelve
tribes, of which the more important are those of the _Shoshones_, the
_Utes_ (Fig. 40), the _Piutes_ or _Pai-Utes_, and the _Comanches_.
Buschmann (_Die Spuren d. Aztek Sprache, etc._, Berlin, 1859) was the
first to draw attention to the affinity of their dialect with the
Sonoran-Aztec linguistic group (see p. 535), while Gibbs (_loc. cit._,
p. 224) was the first to point out their probable migration from the
region situated between the Rocky Mountains and the Great Lakes towards
the deserts of the Great Basin. Brinton (_Amer. Race_, p. 119) confirms
this observation, arriving at his conclusion from new facts.]
[Footnote 618: It should be mentioned that this brachycephaly is
also found, even a little more accentuated, in the skulls which Mr.
Cushing and the members of the Hemenway expedition discovered in the
ancient habitations of the Salado valley and in the Hanolawan pueblo,
attributed to the not very remote ancestors of the Pueblos of the
present day. These skulls are hyper-brachycephalic (mean ceph. ind. of
94 skulls, 89); they also exhibited an extraordinary frequency of the
“Inca bone” (p. 67), and several other osteological peculiarities, as,
for instance, in the structure of the hyoid bone (p. 96).]
[Footnote 619: Orozco y Berra, _Geografia de las lenguas ... de
Mexico_, Mexico, 1864, with ethn. chart (which may still be profitably
consulted).]
[Footnote 620: According to Brinton, the great Uto-Aztecan linguistic
family is composed of three branches: Shoshonean (or Ute), Sonoran, and
Nahuatlan (Aztec).]
[Footnote 621: It is the same with the _Coras_ (3000), and especially
with the _Huicholes_ (4000) of the Nayarit Sierra (north of Jalisco),
who are tillers of the soil, and the last remnants of a formerly
numerous and warlike population. The Huicholes worship the sun and
various plant divinities, more particularly the “peyote” (a cactus,
_Anhalonium Lewinii_), the fruit of which has stimulative and
anaphrodisiac properties. (Hamy, _Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat._, 1898, p. 197;
Lumholtz, _Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist._, 1898, p. 1, with plates; L.
Diguet, _Nouv. Arch. Miss. Scientif._, vol. ix., p. 571, plates, Paris,
1899.)]
[Footnote 622: Hamy, “Distrib. geogr. des Opatus, Tarahumars, etc.,”
_Bull. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris, 1883, p. 785; Ten Kate, “Sur les Pimas,
etc.,” _Bull. Soc. Anthr._, 1883; Lumholtz, “Tarahumara,” _Bull. Amer.
Geogr. Soc._, 1894, p. 219.]
[Footnote 623: It is impossible to enter here into details on the
ancient Aztec society. Let us simply bear in mind that from the
economic point of view it was based on “hoe-culture” (see p. 192) of
maize, tobacco, and cocoa, as well as on a well-developed industry:
the weaving of stuffs, pottery, manufacture of paper, malleation and
melting (a somewhat rare case in pre-Columbian America) of gold,
silver, copper, and bronze. Architecture and sculpture had attained
there a great perfection, as well as ideographic and iconomatic writing
(see p. 140). It was politically a confederacy of democratic states,
often under the dominion of a dictator on whom the Spaniards bestowed
the title of king. It was thought until recent times that there had
been several invasions of different peoples into Mexico, the _Toltecs_
in the first instance, then the _Chichimecs_, lastly the _Nahuatlans_;
but from the recent works by Morgan, _loc. cit._ (_The House-life,
etc._), Bandelier (_Report Peabody Mus._, vol. ii., Cambridge, Mass.,
1888), Brinton (_Essays of an Americanist_, Philadelphia, 1890, and
_Am. Race_), and Bruhl (_Die Culturvolker Alt-Amerikas_, Cincinnati,
1875-87), we may conclude that the name _Toltec_ has only relation to
a small clan or even perhaps to an imaginary mythical people. As to
that of _Chichimec_, it was employed by the Nahuas to denote all those
peoples outside of their own civilisation; they used this term as the
Romans did that of “barbarian.”]
[Footnote 624: L. Biart, _Les Aztèques, histoire, mœurs_, Paris,
1885.]
[Footnote 625: E. Hamy, _loc. cit._ (_Anthr. Mex._); Brinton, _loc.
cit._ (_Am. Race_).]
[Footnote 626: E. Hamy, _loc. cit._, _Bull. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris,
1883, p. 787, chart.]
[Footnote 627: D. Charnay, quoted by Hamy, _loc. cit._ (_Anthr. Mex._).]
[Footnote 628: Berendt, _Bull. Amer. Geogr. Soc._, New York, 1875-76,
No. 2; Brinton, _loc. cit._ (_Am. R._), p. 117.]
[Footnote 629: The Chontals of Nicaragua are the _Lenkas_ (see p. 540).
The “_Popolucas_” of Puebla speak a _Miztec_ dialect; those of Vera
Cruz the _Mixe_ dialect; those of Guatemala the _Cakchiquel_, one of
the Maya dialects adopted as the official language by the Catholic
Church, etc.]
[Footnote 630: Mercer, _Hill-Caves of Yucatan_, Philad., 1896.]
[Footnote 631: A. Stoll, _Zur Ethnogr. d. Rep. Guatemala_, Zurich,
1884; K. Sapper, “Ethnogr. von S.-E. Mexico und Brit. Honduras,”
_Peterm. Mittheil._, 1895, p. 177, chart, and “Die unabhängige
Indianerstaaten von Yucatan,” _Globus_, vol. 67, 1893, p. 196.]
[Footnote 632: See for the geographical distribution of these peoples
in pre-Columbian times, D. Pector, _Arch. Soc. Americaine_, new series,
vol. vi, Paris, 1888, pp. 97 and 145.]
[Footnote 633: Fernandez and Bramford, _Rep. Smiths. Inst._, 1882, p.
675; Brinton, _loc. cit._ (_Am. R._), p. 163.]
[Footnote 634: Wickham, “Soumoo or Woolwa Indians,” _Journ. Anthr.
Inst._, vol. xxiv., 1894-95, p. 198.]
[Footnote 635: The name half-breed (Mestizo) is given in Mexico only to
a child born of the union of a Spaniard with an Indian woman. By being
crossed with a Spaniard a “Mestizo” may give birth to a “Castiza”; the
scion of the latter and a Spaniard reverts, it is said, to the race of
the father, and is set down as Spanish. A Mulatto woman, the offspring
of a Spaniard and a negress, may give birth to a “Morisco” by uniting
with a Spaniard; this Morisco will produce with a Spaniard what is
called an “Albino,” and it is only to her son, the offspring of a
Spanish father, who should revert to his father’s race, that the name
of “Tornatro” will be applied. An Indian marrying a negress produces a
“Sobo,” and the latter engenders with a negress a “Chino.” The progeny
of a Chino and an Indian is called “Cambujo,” and that of an Indian and
a half-breed, “Cayote.” (Hamy, following Ignacio de Castro, quoted by
de Quatrefages, _Hist. Gén. Races Hum._, p. 605.)]
[Footnote 636: I think that it corresponds better with the facts
themselves than the mixed and chronological classification of the South
Americans into four groups (Eskimoid and Ugroid peoples of the early
stone age; Caribs of the later stone age; Mongoloid semi-civilised
brachycephals of the stone and bronze ages; hunting and warlike tribes
of the bronze age) proposed by Siemiradzki, _Mittheil. Anthrop.
Gesellsch._, vol. xxviii., p. 127, Vienna, 1898.]
[Footnote 637: Lafone Quevedo, Preface to the “Arte de la lengua Toba”
of Barcena, _Revista Mus. La Plata_, vol. v., p. 143, 1894. This
distinction is criticised by Brinton, _Proc. Am. Philos. Soc._, vol.
xxxvii., p. 179, Philad., 1898.]
[Footnote 638: The “_Mamelucos_” or _Paulists_ of the province of Sao
Paulo (Brazil), European and Indian half-breeds; the _Gauchos_ of
Chaco, offspring of Whites and Indians of the Pampas; the _Curibocos_,
Indo-negro half-breeds in Brazil, etc.]
[Footnote 639: D’Orbigny, _L’homme Americain_, Paris, 1859, 2 vols.]
[Footnote 640: G. Bovalius, “En reza ... Talamanca Land,” _Ymer_, p.
183, map, Stockholm, 1885.]
[Footnote 641: Pinart, “Chiriqui,” _Bull. Soc. Géogr._, Paris, 1885, p.
433.]
[Footnote 642: The Chibchas were husbandmen, manufacturers, and
merchants, but unacquainted with the use of metals, except gold. They
too have not left any great monuments of architecture (see for further
information the works already quoted of Bruhl, Brinton, etc.).]
[Footnote 643: Are they not related to the _Cayapas_ of Ecuador,
described by Santjago Basurco? (_Tour du Monde_, 1894, p. 401.)]
[Footnote 644: I shall not deal further with the important part which
the Quechua civilisation played in all the western regions of South
America. Let me observe, however, that this civilisation differed in
many respects from that of the Nahuas; the Incas lived under a despotic
communistic régime, they had no art of writing, and were content with
mnemonic means to communicate with one another, they reared the llama,
their religious rites were less sanguinary than those of the Nahua,
etc. (Seler, _Peruanische Alterthüm_, Berlin, 1893; Brinton, _loc.
cit._; Bruhl, _loc. cit._; Uhle, _Kultur Sud-Amerik. Völker_, vol. ii.,
Berlin, 1889-90.)]
[Footnote 645: Middendorf (E.), _Peru_, Berlin, 1893, 3 vols.]
[Footnote 646: Ten Kate, “Excursion Archæol.... Catamarca, etc.,” _Rev.
Mus. La Plata_, vol. v., 1893, p. 329; _Intern. Arch. für Ethnog._,
vol. vii., 1894, p. 142; Ambrozetti, “Archeol. Calchaqui,” _Bol. Inst.
Geog. Arg._, 1896, p. 117; Brinton, _Amer. Anthropologist_, N.S., vol.
i., No. 1, New York, 1899.]
[Footnote 647: L. Catat, “Les Habitants du Darien Merid.,” _Rev.
Ethnogr._, 1888, p. 397; Pinart, “Les Indiens de Panama,” _Rev.
Ethnogr._, No. 33, 1887, p. 117.]
[Footnote 648: Siemiradzki, _loc. cit._, p. 160. The figures here
given from Oldendorf, Manouvrier, Hamy, Virchow, and derived from my
own observations, relate to the Chilian Araucans. The Araucans of the
Pampas are shorter (1 m. 57, according to De la Vaulx, _Compt. rend.
Soc. Geogr._, Paris, 1898, p. 99), and brachycephalic, to judge from
the measurements of Ten Kate (_Rev. Mus. La Plata_, vol. iv., p. 209),
who finds the mean cephalic index of 53 skulls to be 83.92 in a series
in which, however, several skulls of the Palæo-American type are met
with.]
[Footnote 649: The Manzanieros, so named from the country of
crab-apple-tree forests which they inhabit, have preserved better
than the Araucans of the Pampas their physical type; but they have
adopted for the most part, like the latter, the manners and customs of
the Indians of the Pampas and the _Gauchos_ Euro-Indian half-breeds,
similar to the _Cow-boys_ of the western parts of the United States.
They live as nomadic shepherds in tents of guanaco skins, and wear
garments of tanned skin, after the manner of the Gauchos; they have no
pottery, subsist almost exclusively on meat, etc. Excellent horsemen,
they hunt the guanaco with bolas, exactly like the Patagonians and the
Gauchos.]
[Footnote 650: The Archipelagoes of _Chiloé_ and _Chonos_, which
lie off the Chilian coast in the neighbourhood of Cape Peñas, were
peopled by Araucan tribes of _Gauchos_, _Payos_ and _Chonos_, of whom
there remain only a few descendants, with a strain of Spanish blood.
These Gauchos must not be confounded with the half-breeds of the same
name (see above, note 1), nor the Chonos with the tribe of the same
name living farther to the south between Cape Peñas and the Straits
of Magellan; the latter tribe appears to be related rather to the
Fuegians.]
[Footnote 651: For the philology of the Caribs and the Arawaks, see
L. Adam, “Trois fam. linguist.... de l’Amazone, de l’Orénoque, etc.,”
_Congrès Intern. Americanistes_, Berlin, 1888, p. 489, and _Biblioth.
linguist. Americaine_, vol. xviii., Paris, 1893; Von den Steinen, _loc.
cit._, and _Centr. Brasil_, Leipzig, 1886; Ehrenreich, _loc. cit._,
and _Peterm. Mitth._, 1897, No. 4. For the ethnography, see the works
already quoted of Ehrenreich, of Von den Steinen, and the following
works: Schomburgh, _Reisen in Brit. Guyana_, Leipzig, 1847, 2 vols.;
Coudreau, “Note sur 54 trib. Guyane,” _Bull. Soc. Geogr._, Paris, 1891,
and “Dix ans de Guyane,” _ibid._, p. 447, map; E. Im Thurn, _Among the
Indians of Guiana_, London, 1883; Crevaux, _Voyages dans l’Amer. du
Sud_, Paris, 1883; Stoddard, _Cruising among the Caribbees_, London,
1895.]
[Footnote 652: According to Siemiradzki, _loc. cit._, p. 147, the
_Guancavelica_ and _Montubio_ Indians of the coast of Ecuador, who are
completely Hispanified, as well as the _Payaguas_ (see p. 572), bear a
strong resemblance in physical type to the Caribs.]
[Footnote 653: These figures are given from the measurements of
Manouvrier and Deniker (_Bull. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris, 1893), of
Maurel (_Mem. Soc. Anthrop._, Paris, 2nd ser., vol. ii., 1875-85),
Ten Kate (_Rev. d’Anthr._, Paris), and Prince Roland Bonaparte (_Les
Habitants de Surinam_, Paris, 1884), for the Caribs of the north; from
Ehrenreich, _loc. cit._ (_Anthrop. Stud._), for the Caribs of the
south.]
[Footnote 654: See, for example, the summary of the data of ancient
authors in J. Ballet’s _La Guadeloupe_, vol. i., 2nd pt., p. 220,
Basse-Terre, 1894.]
[Footnote 655: O. Ordinaire, “Les Sauvages du Perou,” _Rev. Ethnogr._,
1887, p. 264.]
[Footnote 656: This traveller also mentions a tribe very different from
the _Goajires_, inhabiting the mountains of the north, now completely
unknown. These Indians call themselves _Piecer_(?). They might possibly
have some slight relation with the Arawaks inhabiting the upper valleys
of Sierra Nevada. De Brette, _loc. cit._; H. Candelier, _Rio Hacha et
les ... Goajires_, Paris, 1893.]
[Footnote 657: Particulars concerning the archæological and
osteological remains of the aborigines of the Greater Antilles will be
found in J. Duerden’s “Aborig. Ind. Remains in Jamaica,” _Journ. of
the Instit. of Jamaica_ (with “note on the craniology,” by Haddon),
Kingston, 1897, vol. ii., No. 4; and in Brinton’s “The Archæology of
Cuba,” _Amer. Archæologist_, vol. ii., No. 10, Columbus, 1898.]
[Footnote 658: R. de la Grasserie, _Congr. Internat. Americanistes_,
Berlin, 1888, p. 438.]
[Footnote 659: Barboza Rodriguez (_Revista da Exposiçao Anthrop.
brazileira_, Rio de Janeiro, 1882) has measured four specimens, which
have given him the mean height of 1 m. 47.]
[Footnote 660: Ordinaire (_loc. cit._) also describes together with
these populations the wholly savage tribe of the _Lorenzos_ living
completely in the stone age on the banks of the Palcazu.]
[Footnote 661: Hamy, _Rev. d’Anthr._, 1873, p. 385; Colini, _Atti. Acc.
Lincei._, Rome, 1883.]
[Footnote 662: Both these authors prefer the term “_Ges_” to that
of _Tapuyas_, by which the aborigines in question are known to the
Brazilians. In fact, the word “Tapuya,” which in the Tupi tongue means
“barbarian,” is not only applied to the Ges, but also to a host of
other backward tribes, as, for instance, the _Puris_ (p. 565).]
[Footnote 663: Probably on account of the numerous cataracts on the
rivers.]
[Footnote 664: Maxim Pr. von Wied Newied, _Reise nach Brasil._,
Frankfort-a-M., 1820, 2 vols.; Martius, _Beitr. zur Ethnogr....
Amerikas_, Erlangen-Leipzig, 1863-67; Lacerda and Peixolo, “Contrib.
estudo. Anthrop. das raças Indig. do Brazil,” _Archiv. de Mus.
Nacion._, Rio de Janeiro, vol. i., 1876, p. 47; Ph. Rey, _Étud.
Anthrop. sur les Botocudos_, Paris, 1880 (thesis); Peixoto, “Novos
estudos. craniol. sobra Botocudos,” _Arch. Mus. Nac._, Rio de Janeiro,
vol. vi., 1884, p. 205; Ehrenreich, “Ueber die Botocudos,” _Zeitschr.
für Ethnol._, 1887, pp. 1 and 49.]
[Footnote 665: Castelnau, _Expedition parties Centr. Am. dn Sud. Hist.
des vog._, Paris, 1852-57, 6 vols.; Martius, _loc. cit._; Ehrenreich,
_loc. cit._ (_Peterm. Mitt._).]
[Footnote 666: See the works of Castelnau, Von den Steinen, and
Ehrenreich, already quoted.]
[Footnote 667: J. Koslowsky, “Algun. datos sobre los Bororos,” _Bol.
Inst. Geogr. Argent._, vol. vi., 1895; Ehrenreich, _loc cit._ (_Anthr.
Unter._).]
[Footnote 668: See on this point the suggestive monograph of H. Meyer,
“Bows and Arrows in Centr. Brazil,” _Smiths. Rep. for 1896_, p. 549,
pl., Washington, 1898.]
[Footnote 669: The way in which the aborigines cut trees with their
stone hatchets is remarkable: they make in the first place a great
number of holes all around the trunk, then enlarge them till they
touch, and so form a continuous incision. Similarly, in order to cut a
thin piece of wood from a tree branch they make notches in the latter
at equal distances, then they remove the portions of wood between
the notches, making use of the same stone hatchet like a wedge.
(Ehrenreich, “Mittheil.... Xingu Exped.,” _Zeitschrift für Ethnol._,
1890, p. 61.)]
[Footnote 670: L. Adam, _Bibliothèque Linguist. Amer._, vol. xviii.,
Paris, 1896.]
[Footnote 671: I. Ambrosetti, “Los Indios Caingua,” _Bol. Inst. Geogr.
Argentino_, vol. xv., Buenos Ayres, 1895.]
[Footnote 672: It is in the vicinity of the Cainguas, between the
Parana and the central chain of Paraguay, south of the sources of
the Acaray, that the five or six hundred _Guayakis_ dwell, primitive
hunters, still in the stone age, of whom Bove (_Bull. Soc. Geogr.
Ital._, 1884, p. 939) had caught a glimpse, and whom La Hitte and Ten
Kate have quite recently described (_Ann. Mus. La Plata_, vol. ii.,
_Anthrop._, 1897). Armed with their enormous bows and their polished
stone hatchets, with their caps of jaguar skin, they have rather a
grotesque appearance, and their low stature (the only adult subject
measured was 1 m. 52, and the skeleton of a woman, 1 m. 42), as well
as their legs wide apart, are not such as to improve their appearance.
They are sub-brachycephalic, and nevertheless in type remind us of
the Fuegians and the Botocudos. Their habitations are tree shelters,
sometimes eighty feet long; their principal tool consists of a tooth
of the agôuti fastened to the thigh-bone of a monkey. Their household
vessels are plaited baskets rendered impermeable by the addition of a
layer of wax, etc. The Cainguas are perhaps hybridised Guayakis.]
[Footnote 673: Coudreau, _loc. cit._, pp. 123 and 131.]
[Footnote 674: Köppig, quoted by Brinton (_Am. R._, p. 231). We must
not confound these Cocomas with the tribe of the same name living
between the upper Burus and the Jurua, and which appears to belong to
the Pano family.]
[Footnote 675: Barboza Rodriguez, _loc. cit._; Ehrenreich, _loc. cit._
(_Anthrop. Stud._); D’Orbigny, _loc. cit._, vol. ii., p. 324.]
[Footnote 676: Martin de Moussy, _Descrip. Confed. Argent._, vol. ii.,
p. 141, Paris, 1861, and _Industr. des Indiens La Plata_, Paris, 1866;
Lafone Quevedo, “La Razza Americana de Brinton, etc.,” _Bol. Inst.
Geogr. Argent._, vol. xiv., 1894, p. 524 (on the disappearance of the
Charruas), and _Bol. Inst. Geogr. Argent._, vol. xviii., 1897, pp. 124
and 127; _Arrivée en France de quatre sauvages Charrua_, Paris, 1830,
and Flourens, _Ann. Sc. Nat._, 2nd ser., Zool., vol. viii., p. 156; F.
Outes, _Los Querandies_, Buenos Ayres, 1897, and _Ethnogr. Argent.,
Seconda Contrib. al Ethnog. Querandi_, Buenos Ayres, 1899; Ambrozetti,
“Alfarerias Minuanes,” _Bol. I. G. Argent._, vol. xiv., 1893, p. 212;
I. Quevedo, _Bol. Inst. Geogr. Argent._, vol. xviii., 1897, pp. 117 and
130.]
[Footnote 677: Dobrizhoffer, _An Account of the Abipones_, London,
1822, 2 vols.]
[Footnote 678: L. Quevedo, _loc. cit._, _La Razza_, etc., p. 519, _Arte
Toba_, etc.; Massei and L. Quevedo, “Grupo Mataco-Mataguayo,” _Bol.
Inst. Geogr. Arg._, 1895 and 1896; Pelleschi, “Los Indios Matacos,”
_Bol. Inst. Geogr. Arg._, 1897, p. 173.]
[Footnote 679: Certain authorities (Ameghino, Brinton, etc.) place the
Charruas, the Chanases, and the Querandis in the Tupi-Guaranian family,
and make a separate group of the Matacos.]
[Footnote 680: Boggiani, _Viaggi d’un artista in Amer. Merid._, I.
Caduvei, II. Ciamococo, Rome, 1894-95 (preface and note by Colino); and
“Ethnografia del Alto Paraguay,” _Bol. Inst. Geog. Arg._, vol. xviii.,
1897, p. 613, ethn. chart. According to Brinton (“Ling. Cartogr. of
Chaco,” _Proc. Am. Phil. Soc._, vol. 37, p. 178, Philad., 1898), the
dialect of the _Samucos_ should belong to the Arawak family.]
[Footnote 681: Koslowsky, “Tres semanas entre ... Guatos,” _Bol. Inst.
Geog. Arg._, vol. vi., p. 221, Buenos Ayres, 1895.]
[Footnote 682: Siemiradzki, _loc. cit._; De la Vaulx, _C. R. Soc. Geog.
Paris_, 1898.]
[Footnote 683: Ch. Musters, _At Home with the Patagonians_, London,
1871, and “The Races of Patagonia,” _Journ. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. i.,
1875, p. 193; F. Moreno, _Viage à la Patagon. settentr._ ... Buenos
Ayres, 1876, and _Viage Pat. Austral._, Buenos Ayres, 1879; R. Lista,
_Viage al païs de Tehuelches_, Buenos Ayres, 1878, and _Explorat. de la
Pampa, etc._, Buenos Ayres, 1883. As regards the Onas, see R. Lista,
“La Tierra del Fuego,” _Bol. Inst. Geog. Arg._, vol. ii., 1881, and
_Viage al païs ... Ona_, Buenos Ayres, Darapsky, “Patagonia,” _Bol.
Inst. Geog. Arg._, vol. x., 1889, p. 368; J. Hultkrantz, “Nagra Bidrag,
etc.,” _Ymer_, pt. i., Stockholm, 1898, with figs. The three Ona skulls
described by Hultkrantz are dolichocephalic (ceph. ind. 74.7).]
[Footnote 684: For measurements see the Appendices. The bibliography
of the Fuegians will be found in the work of Hyades and Deniker
already quoted. To these must be added the following selection from
important works omitted or recently published: L. Darapski, “Fuegians,”
_Bol. Inst. Geog. Arg._, vol. x., 1889, p. 276; Bridges, “La Tierra
del Fuego, etc.,” _Bol. Inst. Geog. Arg._, vol. xiv., 1893; and O.
Nordenskjold, “Das Feuerland,” _Geog. Zeitsch._, vol. ii., p. 663,
Leipzig, 1896.]