EXTENT OF VARIATIONS IN ANIMAL AND VEGETABLE RACES; APPLICATION TO
MAN.
I. The question to which this chapter is devoted is one of those
which I shall treat most fully in this course. In fact, it has
a special importance. Nearly all the polygenistic arguments are
included in the following:—“The difference between the Negro and the
White is too great for them to belong to the same species.” These
types are the two extremes in the human series. Therefore, if it can
be shown that between the two extremes, the limits of variation are
almost always greater in plants and animals than in man, we shall
have undermined the foundation of the whole polygenistic doctrine.
Now, even if we leave plants out of the question, and there can
be little doubt in respect to them; if we merely compare man and
animals, organ for organ, function for function, we shall have no
great difficulty in arriving at the conclusion, that this is really
the case; so much so that we shall be led to ask the question,
why the variability is less in man than in animals. The complete
demonstration of this general fact would require more extended
treatment than I am able to give. I shall, therefore, confine myself
to citing some examples.
II. The colouring of the skin is one of the most striking
characteristics, and one which is most apparent to the eye. This
has given rise to the expressions White, Yellow, and Black, which
are most improperly used to designate the three fundamental groups
of mankind. We will first prove that these names possess the grave
inconvenience of giving rise to ideas which are entirely erroneous.
Amongst the _Whites_ there are entire populations, whose skin is as
black as that of the darkest Negro. I shall only quote the Bishareen
and other tribes inhabiting the African coasts of the Red Sea, the
black Moors of Senegal, etc. On the other hand, there are yellow
_Negroes_, as the Bosjesmans, who are the colour of light mahogany,
or of café au lait, as Livingstone tells us.
It is no less true that colour is by far the most variable
characteristic in man, and when we place the _coal black Negro_
side by side with the _fair White_ with his pinkish complexion,
the contrast is striking. But this contrast is repeated in several
races of animals, in the dog, for example, whose skin is generally
blackish, but white in the white poodle. It is the same among horses,
a fact which was known even to Herodotus, who pronounces white horses
with a black skin as superior to all others.
The races of our domestic fowls alone present the three extreme
colours observed in man. The French fowl has a white skin; in the
cochin-china it approaches to yellow; it is black in _black fowls_.
Sometimes they present a peculiarity similar to that which I
mentioned in reference to the horse: a dark skin accompanying a white
plumage as in the _silk hen_ of Japan.
These same _black fowls_ possess several interesting peculiarities
from our present point of view. In Europe, melanism appears from time
to time in our poultry-yards, and would infallibly spread if the
fowls attacked by it were not destroyed. It is perhaps from want of
this precaution that black fowls have been developed in various parts
of the globe, among others in the Philippines, in Java, in the Cape
Verd Islands, and upon the plateau of Bogota, all of which have been
derived from European stocks. Melanism appears moreover, in groups of
fowls which differ most strikingly in other respects, in the silk hen
as well as in our ordinary races.
We see that _black fowls_ are in no sense a distinct species, and
that the appearance of the black colour is merely an accidental
character, which may be produced in races very dissimilar in other
respects, and afterwards propagated by heredity. Why then admit that
it has been otherwise in man?
Again, melanism is more highly developed in fowls than in man. It
has long been held as a recognised fact that the skull of the Negro
is more darkly coloured than that of the White. The fact is true.
But M. Gubler has proved that the skull of a very dark-complexioned
White was coloured exactly in the same manner as that of the Negro,
and that this peculiarity was sometimes individual, and sometimes
hereditary in certain families. In fowls also, melanism penetrates
to the interior; but it is not only the meninges which present
peculiarities similar to those presented by the _black man_. With
them all the mucous, fibrous, and aponeurotic membranes, even to
the muscular sheaths, possess the same colouring. The flesh also
assumes a repugnant appearance, and it is for this reason that the
propagation of black fowls is prevented as much as possible.
The difference in colouring is easily explained. We now know beyond a
doubt that the skin of the Negro is exactly the same in composition
as that of the White. We find the same layers in both; the _dermis_,
the _mucous layer_ and the _epidermis_ present exactly the same
structure. The layers are merely thicker in the Negro. In these two
great races, the mucous layer, situated between the other two, is
the seat of colour. It is formed of cells which are of a pale yellow
colour in the _fair White_, of a more or less brownish yellow in the
_dark White_, and of a blackish brown in the Negro. External causes
have, moreover, an influence upon the organ and modify the coloured
secretion. Simon has shown that freckles are nothing more than spots
upon the skin of the _White_ presenting the characteristics of the
skin of the Negro, and we know that an unusual exposure to the sun
in the men and women of our race, and pregnancy in the latter, is
sufficient to determine the formation of these spots.
Why, then, should it be thought strange that a number of
circumstances, a constant heat, a bright light, &c., should influence
the whole body and perpetuate those modifications which in us are
only circumscribed and transitory. In treating of the formation of
the human races we shall have to bring forward facts which will
clearly prove that this is not merely hypothesis.
Finally, the colour of the skin depends upon a simple secretion
which is subject to modification under a number of circumstances, as
is the case with many others. There is, therefore nothing strange
in the fact that some human groups, differing widely in other
respects, should resemble each other in the matter of colour. This
is the reason why the Hindoo (_Aryan_), the Bisharee and the Moor
(_Semitic_), although belonging to the _White race_, assume the same,
and even a darker hue than the _true Negro_. It also explains the
fact that the colour of the Negro approximates in certain cases, to
that of peoples belonging to the white stock who are more or less of
a brown colour, or assumes a hue which exactly recalls that of the
yellow races.
Thus, in man, as in animals, the aphorism is verified which was
formulated by Linnæus in regard to plants:—_nimium ne crede colori_.
III. I shall not dwell at any length upon the modifications of the
hair and villosities. They are much more apparent than real in man.
Whether fair or black, fine and of a woolly appearance, as in the
Negro, or coarse and stiff, as in the yellow and red races; whether
the transverse section is circular as in the Yellow race, oval, as in
the White, or elliptic, as in the Negro, _the hair remains hair_. The
woolly fleece of our sheep, on the contrary, is in part of Africa,
replaced by a short and smooth hair. In America the same is the case
with the sheep of the Madeleine whenever they are left unshorn; and
on the other hand, in the high plains of the Andes, the wild boars
acquire a kind of coarse wool.
The practice of certain natives of shaving off all hair has made
some travellers believe in the existence of human races which are
entirely hairless; the error has however been recognised. All men
possess hair in the normal places. Hairless dogs and horses are,
however, known to exist. In America, where the oxen have a European
origin, the hair commences with becoming very fine and few in number
with the _pelones_, and disappears entirely with the _calongos_; and
if the latter do not increase in number, it is due to their being
systematically destroyed from an idea that they are a degenerate race.
It is evident that in these several respects the variations are more
extensive in animals than in man.
IV. This fact becomes more evident when it is possible to substitute
exact measurements for merely general ideas, and to compare figures.
The variations in size present this advantage, and it is interesting
to compare from this point of view the extremes of some animal races
with the extremes admitted in human groups.
+-----------+--------------+-----------------+----------------+------+
| SPECIES. | RACE. | | DIFFERENCE. |RATIO.|
+-----------+--------------+-----------------+----------------+------+
| | | m. ft. in. m. ft. in. | |
|Dogs | Small Spaniel| 0·305 1 } | |
| (length) | St. Bernard | 1·328 3 4·27 } 1·025 2 4·27 | 0·2 |
|Rabbits | Niçard | 0·20 7·87 } | |
| (length) | Bélier | 0·60 1 11·62 }0·40 1 3·74 | 0·3 |
|Horse | Shetland | 0·76 2 5·92 } | |
| (height) | Dray Horse | 1·80 5 10·85 } 1·04 3 4·94 | 0·4 |
|Sheep | | 0·325 1 0·79 } | |
| (height) | | 1·040 3 4·94 }0·715 2 4·15 | 0·3 |
|Man (mean | Bosjesman | 1·37 4 5·93 } | |
| height) | Patagonian | 1·72 5 8·11 } 0·35 1 2·18 | 0·8 |
+-----------+--------------+-----------------+----------------+------+
We see that the variation between races is in the horse twice as
great as in man, nearly three times in the sheep and rabbit, and
four times as much in the dog. The difference is perhaps even more
striking in the goat and ox, judging from the terms of comparison
used by several travellers.
If, after having studied the various dimensions of the body, we
compare the differences in proportion presented on the one hand
by animals and on the other by human groups, we shall arrive at
similar results. Without, however, entering into details it will be
sufficient to mention the greyhound and the beagle.
V. One of the most singular external characters, and one which has
often been insisted upon as being necessarily a character of species,
is that presented by the Bosjesman women. It is generally known that
at the lower extremity of the loins they develop a fatty mass which
sometimes increases to a considerable protuberance, as may be seen
in the _Hottentot Venus_, the model of which is in the Paris Museum.
This _steatopygia_ reappears however in certain tribes situated much
further north than the Houzouana races, while Livingstone states
that certain women of the Boors, incontestably of Dutch origin, had
begun to be affected by it. From this fact alone, this exaggerated
development of the adipose tissue loses the value which many wished
to attach to it.
If, however, the steatopygia were to exist only among the Houzouanas
we could not, on that account, regard it as a character of species,
for it has been proved in animals where it is only a character of
race. Pallas has proved this fact in certain sheep of Central Asia.
In these animals the tail disappears and is reduced to a simple
coccyx, to the right and left of which are situated two hemispherical
fatty masses weighing from twenty to thirty pounds each. Here, again,
the variation is proportionally greater than in the Bosjesman woman.
We cannot regard these sheep as a different species, for when the
Russians removed the same animals from the country in which they
were born, the steatopygia disappeared in a few generations. It is,
therefore, merely a character of race which can only be preserved in
the place where it was developed, as may be seen in a number of other
cases.
VI. It is evident that the preceding character is just as much
internal as external; it is also evident that neither the size,
nor the proportions of the trunk and limbs, can vary, unless the
skeleton and the accompanying muscles experience corresponding
modifications. The anatomical characters change then with the race in
animals, as well as external characters. There are, however, certain
facts which relate more directly to anatomy. I will quote a few cases.
A dog’s fore-paw possesses normally five well-formed toes, while
the hind-paws have only four with a rudimentary fifth. This latter
disappears in some races, mostly of a diminutive size. In certain
large races, on the contrary, it is developed, and becomes equal to
the other four. There must be then a formation of bone corresponding
to the tarsus and metatarsus.
Something analogous to the appearance we have just remarked may be
observed in the pig, complicated, however, by a fresh phenomenon.
Here the normal foot bears two small rudimentary lateral toes, and
two medial toes, each with its own hoof. Now in certain races,
already known to the ancients, a third medial toe is developed,
and the whole is enveloped in a single hoof. Instead of being
_cloven-footed_, which is the normal type of the _species_, the race
becomes _solidungulate_.
Nothing of this kind is ever seen in man. In every race the feet
maintain their ordinary composition, in the Bosjesman as in the
Patagonian. Some teratological exceptions with a tendency to heredity
are nevertheless occasionally displayed, of which we shall speak in
another chapter.
VII. The vertebral column is, so to speak, the fundamental portion
of the skeleton, and yet it does not vary the less on that account.
I shall not insist upon the differences presented by its caudal
portion, merely remarking that there are races of dogs, sheep, and
goats, in which the tail is so reduced as to be nothing more than a
short coccyx.
The central portions themselves are known to be liable to change.
Philippi tells us that the oxen of Piacentino had thirteen ribs
instead of twelve, and, consequently, an extra dorsal vertebra. In
the pig Eyton has observed the dorsal vertebræ vary from thirteen to
fifteen, the lumbar from four to six, the sacral from four to five,
and the caudal from thirteen to twenty-three, so that the total is
forty-four in the African pig and fifty-four in the English pig.
In man, the presence of one extra vertebra has occasionally been
observed. These have always been isolated cases, except in one Dutch
family, quoted by Vrolich. But it does not approximate to a constant
character in any human group, and if such a group did exist, it is
evident that the variation would here again be less than in animals,
for without even reckoning the tail, it is three times stronger in
the latter.
Of course, I do not take into consideration what has been so often
said of men asserted to have tails. We now know better how much
credit to attach to this statement. But the variations which take
place in the caudal region among animals teaches us that even a
considerable elongation of the coccyx in a human group, and the
multiplication of the vertebræ which compose it, must not be
considered _à priori_ as a specific character.
VIII. It might have been expected that the head would have
escaped modifications, on account of the importance of the organs
which belong to it. But such is not the case, and here again the
modifications are much greater in animals than in man. Blumenbach
remarked long ago that there was more difference between the head of
a domestic pig and the wild boar than between that of the White and
the Negro. There are no domestic species to which the same remark
cannot be applied. But I shall only remind the reader of the heads of
the bull-dog, greyhound and spaniel.
The extent to which the modifications of the head can be carried is
nowhere more plainly shown than in the _niata_ cattle of Buenos Ayres
and La Plata. This ox exhibits the modifications of the specific
characters similar to those which the bull-dog presents among dogs.
All the forms are shortened and thickened, the head in particular
seeming to have experienced a general movement of concentration. The
inferior maxillary bone, although itself shortened, so far exceeds
the superior in length that the animal is unable to browse the
trees. The cranium is as much deformed as the face; not only are the
forms of the bones modified, but also their relations, not one of
which, according to Professor Owen, has been strictly preserved. This
race, though perfectly established, is not therefore necessarily of
less recent origin; for, as I remarked above, all the American oxen
are descended from European stocks. It is already represented in the
New World by two sub-races, one of which, that of Buenos Ayres, has
preserved the horns, while that of Mexico has lost them.
It is scarcely necessary to remark that no human group presents
anything at all analogous to this.
IX. The several facts which I have here enumerated seem to me
sufficient to justify the proposition which I asserted at the
commencement of the chapter, namely:—that the limits of variation are
almost always more extensive between certain races of animals than
between the most distant human groups.
Consequently, however great the differences existing between
these human groups may be, or may appear to be, to consider them
as _specific characters_ is a perfectly arbitrary estimation of
their value. It is, to say the least, quite as rational, quite as
scientific, to consider these differences only as _characters of
race_, and even on that account to refer all the human groups to a
single species.
The legitimacy of this conclusion is incontestable. Now, I repeat,
that this conclusion is sufficient to destroy the very foundation
of the polygenistic theory. In reality this theory rests entirely
upon _morphological_ considerations. Its partisans, struck only by
the material differences presented by the human groups, have thought
it impossible to account for them, except by the admission of the
existence of several species. By showing that facts of this nature
can be equally well interpreted under the hypothesis of the Unity of
the Species, monogenism and polygenism are, so to speak, placed on an
equal footing.