QUESTION OF UNITY OR PLURALITY OF SPECIES.
Systems of Camper, Blumenbach, Morton, Carus--Investigations of Owen,
Vrolik, Weber--Prolificness of hybrids, the great scientific
stronghold of the advocates of unity of species.
It will be necessary to determine first the physiological bearing of the
word _race_.
In the opinion of many scientific observers, who judge from the first
impression, and take extremes[118] as the basis of their reasoning, the
groups of the human family are distinguished by differences so radical
and essential, that it is impossible to believe them all derived from
the same stock. They, therefore, suppose several other genealogies
besides that of Adam and Eve. According to this doctrine, instead of but
one species in the genus _homo_, there would be three, four, or even
more, entirely distinct ones, whose commingling would produce what the
naturalists call _hybrids_.
General conviction is easily secured in favor of this theory, by placing
before the eyes of the observer instances of obvious and striking
dissimilarities among the various groups. The critic who has before him
a human subject with a skin of olive-yellow; black, straight, and thin
hair; little, if any beard, eyebrows, and eyelashes; a broad and
flattened face, with features not very distinct; the space between the
eyes broad and flat; the orbits large and open; the nose flattened; the
cheeks high and prominent; the opening of the eyelids narrow, linear,
and oblique, the inner angle the lowest; the ears and lips large; the
forehead low and slanting, allowing a considerable portion of the face
to be seen when viewed from above; the head of somewhat a pyramidal
form; the limbs clumsy; the stature humble; the whole conformation
betraying a marked tendency to obesity:[119] the critic who examines
this specimen of humanity, at once recognizes a well characterized and
clearly defined type, the principal features of which will readily be
imprinted in his memory.
Let us suppose him now to examine another individual: a negro, from the
western coast of Africa. This specimen is of large size, and vigorous
appearance. The color is a jetty black, the hair crisp, generally called
_woolly_; the eyes are prominent, and the orbits large; the nose thick,
flat, and confounded with the prominent cheeks; the lips very thick and
everted; the jaws projecting, and the chin receding; the skull assuming
the form called prognathous. The low forehead and muzzle-like elongation
of the jaws, give to the whole being an almost animal appearance, which
is heightened by the large and powerful lower-jaw, the ample provision
for muscular insertions, the greater size of cavities destined for the
reception of the organs of smell and sight, the length of the forearm
compared with the arm, the narrow and tapering fingers, etc. "In the
negro, the bones of the leg are bent outwards; the tibia and fibula are
more convex in front than in the European; the calves of the legs are
very high, so as to encroach upon the hams; the feet and hand, but
particularly the former, are flat; the os calcis, instead of being
arched, is continued nearly in a straight line with the other bones of
the foot, which is remarkably broad."[120]
In contemplating a human being so formed, we are involuntarily reminded
of the structure of the ape, and we feel almost inclined to admit that
the tribes of Western Africa are descended from a stock which bears but
a slight and general resemblance to that of the Mongolian family.
But there are some groups, whose aspect is even less flattering to the
self-love of humanity than that of the Congo. It is the peculiar
distinction of Oceanica to furnish about the most degraded and repulsive
of those wretched beings, who seem to occupy a sort of intermediate
station between man and the mere brute. Many of the groups of that
latest-discovered world, by the excessive leanness and starveling
development of their limbs;[121] the disproportionate size of their
heads; the excessive, hopeless stupidity stamped upon their
countenances; present an aspect so hideous and disgusting,
that--contrasted with them--even the negro of Western Africa gains in
our estimation, and seems to claim a less ignoble descent than they.
We are still more tempted to adopt the conclusions of the advocates for
the plurality of species, when, after having examined types taken from
every quarter of the globe, we return to the inhabitants of Europe and
Southern and Western Asia. How vast a superiority these exhibit in
beauty, correctness of proportion, and regularity of features! It is
they who enjoy the honor of having furnished the living models for the
unrivalled masterpieces of ancient sculpture. But even among these races
there has existed, since the remotest times, a gradation of beauty, at
the head of which the European may justly be placed, as well for
symmetry of limbs as for vigorous muscular development. Nothing, then,
would appear more reasonable than to pronounce the different types of
mankind as foreign to each other as are animals of different species.
Such, indeed, was the conclusion arrived at by those who first
systematized their observations, and attempted to establish a
classification; and so far as this classification depended upon general
facts, it seemed incontestable.
_Camper_ took the lead. He was not content with deciding upon merely
superficial appearances, but wished to rest his demonstrations upon a
mathematical basis, by defining, anatomically, the distinguishing
characteristics of different types. If he succeeded in this, he would
thereby establish a strict and logical method of treating the subject,
preclude all doubt, and give to his opinions that rigorous precision
without which there is no true science. I borrow from Mr. Prichard,[122]
Camper's own account of his method. "The basis on which the distinction
of nations[123] is founded, says he, may be displayed by two straight
lines; one of which is to be drawn through the _meatus auditorius_ (the
external entrance of the ear) to the base of the nose; and the other
touching the prominent centre of the forehead, and falling thence on the
most prominent part of the upper jaw-bone, the head being viewed in
profile. In the angle produced by these two lines, may be said to
consist, not only the distinctions between the skulls of the several
species of animals, but also those which are found to exist between
different nations; and it might be concluded that nature has availed
herself of this angle to mark out the diversities of the animal kingdom,
and at the same time to establish a scale from the inferior tribes up to
the most beautiful forms which are found in the human species. Thus it
will be found that the heads of birds display the smallest angle, and
that it always becomes of greater extent as the animal approaches more
nearly to the human figure. Thus, there is one species of the ape tribe,
in which the head has a facial angle of forty-two degrees; in another
animal of the same family, which is one of those simiæ most
approximating in figure to mankind, the facial angle contains exactly
fifty degrees. Next to this is the head of an African negro, which, as
well as that of the Kalmuc, forms an angle of seventy degrees; while the
angle discovered in the heads of Europeans contains eighty degrees. On
this difference of ten degrees in the facial angle, the superior beauty
of the European depends; while that high character of sublime beauty,
which is so striking in some works of ancient statuary, as in the head
of Apollo, and in the Medusa of Sisocles, is given by an angle which
amounts to one hundred degrees."
This method was seductive from its exceeding simplicity. Unfortunately,
facts were against it, as happens to a good many theories. The curious
and interesting discoveries of Prof. Owen have proved beyond dispute,
that Camper, as well as other anatomists since him, founded all their
observations on orangs of immature age, and that, while the jaws become
enlarged, and lengthened with the increase of the maxillary apparatus,
and the zygomatic arch is extended, no corresponding increase of the
brain takes place. The importance of this difference of age, with
respect to the facial angle, is very great in the simiæ. Thus, while
Camper, measuring the skull of young apes, has found the facial angle
even as much as sixty-four degrees; in reality, it never exceeds, in the
most favored specimen, from thirty to thirty-five. Between this figure
and the seventy degrees of the negro and Kalmuc, there is too wide a gap
to admit of the possibility of Camper's ascending series.
The advocates of phrenological science eagerly espoused the theory of
the Dutch _savant_. They imagined that they could detect a development
of instincts corresponding to the rank which the animal occupied in his
scale. But even here facts were against them. It was objected that the
elephant--not to mention numerous other instances--whose intelligence
is incontestably superior to that of the orang, presents a much more
acute facial angle than the latter. Even among the ape tribes, the most
intelligent, those most susceptible of education, are by no means the
highest in Camper's scale.
Besides these great defects, the theory possessed another very weak
point. It did not apply to all the varieties of the human species. The
races with pyramidal skulls found no place in it. Yet this is a
sufficiently striking characteristic.
Camper's theory being refuted, _Blumenbach_ proposed another system. He
called his invention _norma verticalis_, the vertical method. According
to him,[124] the comparison of the breadth of the head, particularly of
the vertex, points out the principal and most strongly marked
differences in the general configuration of the cranium. He adds that
the whole cranium is susceptible of so many varieties in its form, the
parts which contribute more or less to determine the national character
displaying such different proportions and directions, that it is
impossible to subject all these diversities to the measurement of any
lines and angles. In comparing and arranging skulls according to the
varieties in their shape, it is preferable to survey them in that method
which presents at one view the greatest number of characteristic
peculiarities. "The best way of obtaining this end is to place a series
of skulls, with the cheek-bones on the same horizontal line, resting on
the lower jaws, and then, viewing them from behind, and fixing the eye
on the vertex of each, to mark all the varieties in the shape of parts
that contribute most to the national character, whether they consist in
the direction of the maxillary and malar bones, in the breadth or
narrowness of the oval figure presented by the vertex, or in the
flattened or vaulted form of the frontal bone."
The results which Blumenbach deduced from this method, were a division
of mankind into five grand categories, each of which was again
subdivided into a variety of families and types.
This classification, also, is liable to many objections. Like Camper's,
it left out several important characteristics. _Owen_ supposed that
these objections might be obviated by measuring the basis of the skull
instead of the summit. "The relative proportions and extent," says
Prichard, "and the peculiarities of formation of the different parts of
the cranium, are more fully discovered by this mode of comparison, than
by any other." One of the most important results of this method was the
discovery of a line of demarcation between man and the anthropoid apes,
so distinct, and clearly drawn, that it becomes thenceforward impossible
to find between the two genera the connecting link which Camper supposed
to exist. It is, indeed, sufficient to cast one glance at the bases of
two skulls, one human, and the other that of an orang, to perceive
essential and decisive differences. The antero-posterior diameter of the
basis of the skull is, in the orang, very much longer than in man. The
zygoma is situated in the middle region of the skull, instead of being
included, as in all races of men, and even human idiots, in the anterior
half of the basis cranii; and it occupies in the basis just one-third
part of the entire length of its diameter. Moreover, the position of the
great occipital foramen is very different in the two skulls; and this
feature is very important, on account of its relations to the general
character of structure, and its influence on the habits of the whole
being. This foramen, in the human head, is very near the middle of the
basis of the skull, or, rather, it is situated immediately behind the
middle transverse diameter; while, in the adult chimpantsi, it is
placed in the middle of the posterior third part of the basis
cranii.[125]
Owen certainly deserves great credit for his observations, but I should
prefer the most recent, as well as ingenious, of cranioscopic systems,
that of the learned American, Dr. Morton, which has been adopted by Mr.
Carus.[126]
The substance of this theory is, that individuals are superior in
intellect in proportion as their skulls are larger.[127] Taking this as
the general rule, Dr. Morton and Mr. Carus proceed thereby to
demonstrate the difference of races. The question to be decided is,
whether all types of the human race have the same craniological
development.
To elucidate this fact, Dr. Morton took a certain number of skulls,
belonging to the four principal human families--Whites, Mongolians,
Negroes, and North American Indians--and, after carefully closing every
aperture, except the _foramen magnum_, he measured their capacity by
filling them with well dried grains of pepper. The results of this
measurement are exhibited in the subjoined table.[128]
-------------------------+-----------+----------+----------+----------
| Number | | |
| of skulls | Average | Maximum. | Minimum.
| measured. | capacity.| |
-------------------------|-----------|----------|----------|----------
White races | 52 | 87 | 109 | 75
Yellow races {Mongolians| 10 | 83 | 93 | 69
{Malays | 18 | 81 | 89 | 64
Copper-colored races | 147 | 82 | 100 | 60
Negroes | 29 | 78 | 94 | 65
-------------------------+-----------+----------+----------+----------
The results given in the first two columns are certainly very curious,
but to those in the last two I attach little value. These two columns,
giving the maximum and minimum capacities, differ so greatly from the
second, which shows the average, that they could be of weight only if
Mr. Morton had experimented upon a much greater number of skulls, and if
he had specified the social position of the individuals to whom they
belonged. Thus, for his specimens of the white and copper-colored races,
he might select skulls that had belonged to individuals rather above the
common herd.[129] But the Blacks and Mongolians were not represented by
the skulls of their great chiefs and mandarins. This explains why Dr.
Morton could ascribe the figure 100 to an aboriginal of America, while
the most intelligent Mongolian that he examined did not exceed 93, and
is surpassed even by the negro, who reaches 94. Such results are
entirely incomplete, fortuitous, and of no scientific value. In
questions of this kind, too much care cannot be taken to reject
conclusions which are based upon the examination of individualities. I
am, therefore, unable to accept the second half of Dr. Morton's
calculations.
I am also disposed to doubt one of the details in the other half. The
figures 100, 83, and 78, respectively indicating the average capacity of
the skull of the white, Mongolian, and negro, follow a clear and evident
gradation. But the figures 83, 81, and 82, given for the Mongol, the
Malay, and the red-skin, are conflicting; the more so, as Mr. Carus does
not hesitate to comprise the Mongols and Malays into one and the same
race, and thus unites the figures 83 and 81--by which he receives, as
the average capacity of the yellow race, 82, or the same as that of the
red-skins. Wherefore, then, take the figure 82 as the characteristic of
a distinct race, and thus create, quite arbitrarily, a fourth great
subdivision of our species.
This anomaly supports the weak side of Mr. Carus's system. The learned
Saxon amuses himself by supposing that, just as we see our planet pass
through the four stages of day, night, morning twilight, and evening
twilight, so there _must_ be four subdivisions of the human species,
corresponding to these variations of light. He perceives in this a
symbol,[130] which is always a dangerous temptation to a mind of refined
susceptibilities. The white races are to him the nations of day; the
black, those of night; the yellow, those of morning; the red, those of
evening. It will be perceived how many ingenious analogies may be
brought forward in support of this fanciful invention. Thus, the
European nations, by the brilliancy of their scientific discoveries and
their superior civilization, are in an enlightened state, while the
blacks are plunged in the gloomy darkness of ignorance. The Eastern
nations live in a sort of twilight, which affords them an incomplete,
though powerful, social existence. And as for the Indians of the Western
World, who are rapidly disappearing, what more beautiful image of their
destiny can be found than the setting sun?
Unfortunately, parables are no arguments, and Mr. Carus has somewhat
injured his beautiful theory by unduly abandoning himself to this
poetical current. Moreover, what I have said with regard to all other
ethnological theories--those of Camper, Blumenbach, and Owen--holds good
of this: Mr. Carus does not succeed in systematizing regularly the
whole of the physiological diversities observable in races.[131]
The advocates for unity of species have not failed to take advantage of
this inability on the part of their opponents to find a system which
will include the many varieties of the human family; and they pretend
that, as the observations upon the conformation of the skull cannot be
reduced to a system which demonstrates the original separation of types,
the different varieties must be regarded as simple divergencies
occasioned by adventitious and secondary causes, and which do not prove
a difference of origin.
This is crying victory too soon. The difficulty of finding a method does
not always prove that none can be found. But the believers in the unity
of species did not admit this reserve. To set off their theory, they
point to the fact that certain tribes, belonging to the same race,
instead of presenting the same physical type, diverge from it very
considerably. They cite the different groups of the mixed
Malay-Polynesian family; and, without paying attention to the proportion
of the elements which compose the mixtures, they say that if groups of
the same origin can assume such totally different craniological and
facial forms, the greatest diversities of that kind do not prove the
primary plurality of origins.[132] Strange as it may be to European
eyes, the distinct types of the negro and the Mongolian are not then
demonstrative of difference of species; and the differences among the
human family must be ascribed simply to certain local causes operating
during a greater or less lapse of time.[133]
The advocates for the plurality of races, being met with so many
objections, good as well as bad, have attempted to enlarge the circle of
their arguments, and, ceasing to make the skull their only study, have
proceeded to the examination of the entire individual. They have rightly
shown that the differences do not exist merely in the aspect of the face
and formation of the skull, but, what is no less important, they exist
also in the shape of the pelvis, the relative proportion of the limbs,
and the nature of the pilous system.
Camper and other naturalists had long since perceived that the pelvis of
the negro presented certain peculiarities. Dr. Vrolik extended his
researches further, and observed that in the European race the
differences between the male and female pelvis are much less distinctly
marked, while the pelvis of the negro, of either sex, partakes in a very
striking degree of the animal character. The Amsterdam _savant_,
starting from the idea that the formation of the pelvis necessarily
influences that of the foetus, concludes that there must be difference
of origin.[134]
Mr. Weber has attacked this theory with but little success. He was
obliged to allow that certain formations of the pelvis occur more
frequently in one race than in another; and all he could do, was to show
that the rule is not without exceptions, and that some individuals of
the American, African, or Mongol race presented the forms common among
the European. This is not proving a great deal, especially as it never
seems to have occurred to Mr. Weber that these exceptions might be owing
to a mixture of blood.
The adversaries of the unity doctrine pretend that the European is
better proportioned. They are answered that the excessive leanness of
the extremities among those nations which subsist principally on
vegetable diet, or whose alimentation is imperfect, is not at all
surprising; and this reply is certainly valid. But a much less
conclusive reply is made to the argument drawn from the excessive
development of bust among the mountaineers of Peru (Quichuas) by those
who are unwilling to recognize it as a specific characteristic; for to
pretend, as they do, that it can be explained by the elevation of the
Andes, is not advancing a very serious reason.[135] There are in the
world many mountain populations who are constituted very differently
from the Quichuas.[136]
The color of the skin is another argument for diversity of origin. But
the opposite party refuse to accept this as a specific characteristic,
for two reasons: first, because, they say, this coloration depends upon
climatic circumstances, and is not permanent--which is, to say the least
of it, a very bold assertion; secondly, because color is liable to
indefinite gradations, by which white insensibly passes into yellow,
yellow into black, so that it is impossible to find a line of
demarcation sufficiently decided. This fact simply proves the existence
of innumerable hybrids; an observation to which the advocates for unity
are constantly inattentive.
With regard to the specific differences in the formation of the pile,
Mr. Flourens brings his great authority in favor of the original unity
of race.[137]
I have now passed rapidly in review the more or less inconsistent
arguments of the advocates of unity; but their strongest one still
remains. It is of great force, and I therefore reserved it for the
last--the facility with which the different branches of the human family
produce hybrids, and the fecundity of these hybrids themselves.
The observations of naturalists seem to have well established the fact
that half-breeds can spring only from nearly related species, and that
even in that case they are condemned to sterility. It has been further
observed that, even among closely allied species, where fecundation is
possible, copulation is repugnant, and obtained, generally, either by
force or ruse, which would lead us to suppose that, in a state of
nature, the number of hybrids is even more limited than that obtained by
the intervention of man. It has, therefore, been concluded that, among
the number of specific characteristics, we must place the faculty of
producing prolific offspring.
As nothing authorizes us to believe that the human race are exempt from
this law, so nothing has hitherto been able to shake the strength of
this objection,[138] which, more than all the others, holds the
advocates for plurality in check. It is, indeed, affirmed that, in
certain portions of Oceanica, indigenous women, after having brought
forth a half-breed European child, can no longer be fecundated by
compatriots. If this assertion be admitted as correct, it might serve as
a starting point for further investigations; but at present it could not
be used to invalidate the admitted principles of science upon the
generation of hybrids--against the deductions drawn from these it proves
nothing.
FOOTNOTES:
[118] M. Flourens, _Eloge de Blumenbach, Mémoires de l'Académie des
Sciences_. Paris, 1847, p. xiii. This _savant_ justly protests against
such a method.
[119] For the description of types in this and other portions of this
chapter, I am indebted to
M. WILLIAM LAWRENCE, _Lect. on the Nat. Hist. of Man_. London, 1844. But
especially to the learned
JAMES COWLES PRICHARD, _Nat. Hist. of Man_. London, 1848.
[120] Prichard, _op. cit._, p. 129.
[121] It is impossible to conceive an idea of the scarce human form of
these creatures, without the aid of pictorial representations. In
Prichard's _Natural History of Man_ will be found a plate (No. 23, p.
355) from M. d'Urville's atlas, which may assist the reader in gaining
an idea of the utmost hideousness that the human form is capable of. I
cannot but believe that the picture there given is considerably
exaggerated, but with all due allowance in this respect, enough ugliness
will be left to make us almost ashamed to recognize these beings as
belonging to our kind.--H.
[122] _Op. cit._, p. 111.
[123] It will be observed that Prichard and Camper, and further on
Blumenbach, here use the word _nation_ as synonymous to _race_. See my
introduction, p. 65.--H.
[124] Prichard, _op. cit._, p. 115.
[125] _Op. cit._, p. 117.
[126] Carus, _Ueber ungleiche Befähigung_, etc., p. 19.
[127] _Op. cit._, p. 20.
[128] As Mr. Gobineau has taken the facts presented by Dr. Morton at
second hand, and, moreover, had not before him Dr. Morton's later tables
and more matured deductions, Dr. Nott has given an abstract of the
result arrived at by the learned craniologist, as published by himself
in 1849. This abstract, and the valuable comments of Dr. Nott himself,
will be found in the Appendix, under A.--H.
[129] I fear that our author has here fallen into an error which his own
facts disprove, and which is still everywhere received without
examination, viz: that cultivation can change the form or size of the
head, either of individuals or races; an opinion, in support of which,
no facts whatever can be adduced. The heads of the barbarous races of
Europe were precisely the same as those of civilized Europe in our day;
this is proven by the disinterred crania of ancient races, and by other
facts. Nor do we see around us among the uneducated, heads inferior in
form and size to those of the more privileged classes. Does any one
pretend that the nobility of England, which has been an educated class
for centuries, have larger heads, or more intelligence than the ignoble?
On the contrary, does not most of the talent of England spring up from
plebeian ranks? Wherever civilization has been brought to a population
of the white race, they have accepted it at once--their heads required
no development. Where, on the contrary, it has been carried to Negroes,
Mongols, and Indians, they have rejected it. Egyptians and Hindoos have
small heads, but we know little of the early history of their
civilization. Egyptian monuments prove that the early people and
language of Egypt were strongly impregnated with Semitic elements.
Latham has shown that the Sanscrit language was carried _from_ Europe to
India, and probably civilization with it.
I have looked in vain for twenty years for evidence to prove that
cultivation could enlarge a _brain_, while it expands the mind. The head
of a boy at twelve is as large as it ever is.--N.
[130] Carus, _op. cit._, p. 12.
[131] There are some very slight ones, which nevertheless are very
characteristic. Among this number I would class a certain enlargement on
each side of the lower lip, which is found among the English and
Germans. I find this indication of Germanic origin in several paintings
of the Flemish school, in the _Madonna_ of Rubens, in the museum of
Dresden, in the _Satyrs_ and _Nymphs_ of the same collection, in a
_Lute-player_ of Miéris, etc. No cranioscopic method whatever could
embrace such details, which, however, are not without value in the great
mixture of races which Europe presents.
[132] Prichard, _op. cit._, p. 329.
[133] Job Ludolf, whose facilities of observation must necessarily have
been very defective when compared with those we enjoy at the present
day, nevertheless combats in very forcible language, and with
arguments--so far as concerns the negro--invincible, the opinion here
adopted by Mr. Prichard. I cannot refrain from quoting him in this
place, not for any novelty contained in his arguments, but to show their
very antiquity: "De nigredine Æthiopum hic agere nostri non
est instituti, plerique ardoribus solis atquæ zonæ torridæ id tribuant.
Verum etiam intra solis orbitam populi dantur, si non plane albi, saltem
non prorsus nigri. Multi extra utrumque tropicum a media mundi linea
longius absunt quam Persæ aut Syri, veluti pramontorii Bonæ Spei
habitantes, et tamen iste sunt nigerrimi. Si Africæ tantum et Chami
posteris id inspectari velis, Malabares et Ceilonii aliique remotiores
Asiæ populi æque nigri excipiendi erunt. Quod si causam ad coeli
solique naturam referas, non homines albi in illis regionibus
renascentes non nigrescunt? Aut qui ad occultas qualitates confugiunt,
melius fecerint si sese nescire fateantur."--JOBUS LUDOLFUS,
_Commentarium ad Historiam Æthiopicam_, fol. Norimb. p. 56.
[134] Prichard, _op. cit._, p. 124.
[135] Prichard, _op. cit._, p. 433.
[136] Neither the Swiss, nor the Tyrolese, nor the Highlanders of
Scotland, nor the Sclaves of the Balkan, nor the tribes of the Himaleh,
nor any other mountaineers whatever, present the monstrous appearance of
the Quichuas.
[137] The distinguished microscopist, Dr. Peter A. Browne, of
Philadelphia, has published the most elaborate observations on hair, of
any author I have met with; and he asserts that the pile of the negro is
_wool_, and not hair. He has gone so far as to distinguish the leading
races of men by the direction, shape, and structure of the hair. The
reader is referred to his works for much very curious, new, and valuable
matter.--N.
To those of our readers who may not have the inclination or opportunity
of consulting Mr. Browne's work, the following concise and excellent
synopsis of his views, which I borrow from Dr. Kneeland's _Introduction
to Hamilton Smith's Natural History of Man_, may not be unacceptable:
"There are, on microscopical examination, three prevailing forms of the
transverse section of the filament, viz: the cylindrical, the oval, and
the eccentrically elliptical. There are also three directions in which
it pierces the epidermis. The straight and lank, the flowing or curled,
and the crisped or frizzled, differ respectively as to the angle which
the filament makes with the skin on leaving it. The cylindrical and oval
pile has an oblique angle of inclination. The eccentrically elliptical
pierces the epidermis at right angles, and lies perpendicularly in the
dermis. The hair of the white man is oval; that of the Choctaw, and some
other American Indians, is cylindrical; that of the negro is
eccentrically elliptical or flat. The hair of the white man has, beside
its cortex and intermediate fibres, a central canal, which contains the
coloring matter when present. The pile of the negro has no central
canal, and the coloring matter is diffused, when present, either
throughout the cortex or the intermediate fibres. Hair, according to
these observations, is more complex in its structure than wool. In hair,
the enveloping scales are comparatively few, with smooth surfaces,
rounded at their points, and closely embracing the shaft. In wool, they
are numerous, rough, sharp-pointed, and project from the shaft. _Hence,
the hair of the white man will not felt, that of the negro will._ In
this respect, therefore, it comes near to true wool"--pp. 88, 89.--H.
[138] A full answer to this objection will be found in our Appendix,
under _B_.--N.