Produced by Julia Miller, Wayne Hammond and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
RACES AND PEOPLES
LECTURES
ON THE
SCIENCE OF ETHNOGRAPHY
BY
DANIEL G. BRINTON, A.M., M.D.,
_Professor of Ethnology at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia,
and of American Archæology and Linguistics in the University of Pennsylvania;
President of the American Folk-Lore Society and of the
Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia; Member
of the Anthropological Societies of Berlin and Vienna and of
the Ethnographical Societies of Paris and Florence, of
the Royal Society of Antiquaries, Copenhagen, the
Royal Academy of History of Madrid, the
American Philosophical Society, the
American Antiquarian Society,
Etc., Etc., Etc._
PHILADELPHIA
DAVID McKAY, PUBLISHER
1901
COPYRIGHT
BY D. G. BRINTON.
TO HORATIO HALE,
PHILOLOGIST TO THE UNITED STATES EXPLORING
EXPEDITION IN 1838-42,
WHOSE MANY AND VALUABLE
CONTRIBUTIONS TO LINGUISTICS AND ETHNOGRAPHY
PLACE HIM TO-DAY AMONG THE FOREMOST AUTHORITIES
ON THESE SCIENCES,
THIS VOLUME
IS INSCRIBED IN RESPECT AND FRIENDSHIP
BY THE AUTHOR.
PREFACE.
The lectures which appear in this volume were delivered at the Academy
of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, in the early months of 1890. They
have since been written out, and references added in the foot-notes to
a number of works and articles, which will enable the student to pursue
his readings on any point in which he may be interested. My endeavor
has been to present the results of the latest and most accurate
researches on the subjects treated; though no one can be better aware
than myself that in compressing such an extensive science into so
limited a space, I have often necessarily been superficial. It is some
excuse for the publication, if one is needed, that I am not aware of
any other recent work upon this science written in the English language.
_Philadelphia, August, 1890._
CONTENTS.
LECTURE I.
PAGE
THE PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY 17
CONTENTS.--Differences and resemblances in individuals and
races the basis of Ethnography. The _Bones_. Craniology.
Its limited value. Long and short skulls. Height of skull.
Sutures. Inca bone. The orbital index. The nasal index.
The maxillary and facial angles. The cranial capacity. The
teeth. The iliac bones. Length of the arms. The flattened
tibia. The projecting heel. The heart line. The Color.
Its extent; cause; scale of colors. Color of the eyes. The
Hair. Shape in cross section; abundance. The muscular
structure; anomalies in; muscular habits: arrow releases.
Steatopygy, Stature and proportion; the “canon of proportion;”
special senses; the color-sense. Ethnic relations of
the sexes. Beauty; muscular power; brain capacity; viability.
Correlation of physical traits to vital powers. Tolerance
of climate and disease. Causes of the fixation of ethnic
traits. Climate; food supply; natural selection; conscious
selection; the physical ideal; sexual preference; abhorrence
of incest; exogamous marriages. Causes of variation in
types. Changes in environment; migrations; reversion;
albinism and melanism; fecundity and sterility. The mingling
of races; métissage. Physical criteria of racial superiority.
Review of physical elements.
LECTURE II.
THE PSYCHICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY 51
CONTENTS.--The mental differences of races. Ethnic psychology.
Cause of psychical development.
I. THE ASSOCIATIVE ELEMENTS. 1. The Social Instincts:
sexual impulse; primitive marriage; conception of love;
parental affection; filial and fraternal affection; friendship;
ancestral worship; the gens or clan; the tribe; personal
loyalty; the social organization; systems of consanguinity;
position of woman in the state; ethical standards; modesty.
2. Language: universality of; primeval speech; rise of
linguistic stocks; their number; grammatical structure;
classes of languages; morphologic scheme; relation of
language to thought; significance of language in ethnography.
3. Religion: universality of; early forms; family and tribal
religions; universal or world religions; ethnic study of religions;
comparison of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism;
material and ideal religions; associative influences of religions.
4. The Arts of Life: architecture; agriculture;
domestication of animals; inventions.
II. THE DISPERSIVE ELEMENTS: adaptability of man to surroundings.
1. The Migratory Instincts: love of roaming;
early commerce; lines of traffic and migration. 2. The
Combative Instincts: primitive condition of war; love of
combat; its advantages; heroes; development through
conflict.
LECTURE III.
THE BEGINNINGS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF RACES 79
CONTENTS.--The origin of Man. Theories of monogenism and
polygenism; of evolution; heterogenesis. Identities point
to one origin. Birthplace of the species. The oldest human
relics. Remains of the highest apes. Question of climate.
Negative arguments. Darwin’s belief that the species originated
in Africa confirmed; but with modifications. Quarternary
geography of Europe and Africa. Northern Africa
united with Southern Europe. Former shore lines. The
Sahara Sea. The quaternary continents of “Eurafrica”
and “Austafrica.” Relics of man in them. Man in pre-glacial
times. The Glacial Age. Effect on man. His condition
and acquirements. Appearance of primitive man.
His development into races. Approximate data of this.
Localities where it occurred. The “areas of characterization.”
Relations of continents to races. Theory of Linnaeus;
of modern ethnography. The continental areas:
Eurafrica; Austafrica; Asia; America. Classification of
races. Subdivisions of races; branches; stocks; groups;
peoples; tribes; nations. General ethnographic scheme.
Other terms: ethnos and ethnic; culture; civilization.
Stadia of culture.
LECTURE IV.
THE EURAFRICAN RACE; SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN
BRANCH 103
CONTENTS.--The White Race. Synonyms. Properly an African
Race; relative areas; purest specimens. Types of the
White race; Libyo-Teutonic type; Cymric type; Celtic
type; Euskaric type. Variability of traits. Primal home
of the White Race not in Asia, but in Eurafrica. Early
migrations and subdivisions. North Mediterranean and
South Mediterranean branches.
_A._--THE SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.
I. THE HAMITIC STOCK. Relation to Semitic. 1. The Libyan
Group. Location. Peoples included. Physical appearance.
The Libyan blondes; languages. Early history;
European affiliations; relations to Iberian tribes: the names
_Iberi_ and _Berberi_. Government. Migration. The Etruscans
as Libyans. Later history; present culture. Syrian
Hamites and their influence. 2. The Egyptian Group.
Kinship to Libyans. Physical appearance. The stone age
in Egypt. Antiquity of Egyptian culture. Its influence.
Physical traits. 3. The East African Group. Relations to
Egypt.
II. THE SEMITIC STOCK. First entered Arabia from Africa.
1. The Arabian Group. Early divisions and culture. The
Arabs. Physical types; mental temperament; religious
idealisms. 2. The Abyssinian Group. Tribes included.
Period of migration. Condition. 3. The Chaldean Group.
Tribes included. The modern Jew.
LECTURE V.
THE EURAFRICAN RACE; NORTH MEDITERRANEAN
BRANCH 141
CONTENTS.--_B._--THE NORTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.
I. THE EUSKARIC STOCK. Basques and their congeners. Physical
type. Language.
II. _The Aryac Stock._ Synonyms. Origin of the Aryans.
Supposed Asiatic origin now doubted. The Aryac physical
type. The prot-Aryac language. Culture of proto-Aryans.
The “proto-Aryo-Semitic” tongue. Development of inflections.
Prot-Aryac migrations. Southern and northern
streams. Approximate dates. Scheme of Aryac migrations.
Divisions. 1. The Celtic Peoples. Members and
location. Physical and mental traits. 2. The Italic Peoples.
Ancient and modern members. Physical traits. The
modern Romance nations. Mental traits. 3. The Illyric
Peoples. Members and physical traits. 4. The Hellenic
Peoples. Ancient and modern Greeks. Physical type.
Influence of Greek culture. 5. The Lettic Peoples. Position
and language. 6. The Teutonic Peoples. Ancient
and modern members. Mental character. Recent progress.
7. The Slavonic Peoples. Ancient and modern members.
Physical traits. Recent expansion. Character. Relations
to Asiatic Aryans. 8. The Indo-Eranic Peoples. Arrival
in Asia. Location. Members. Indian Aryans. Appearance.
Mental aptitude.
III. THE CAUCASIC STOCK. Its languages. Various groups
and members. Physical types. Error of supposing the
white race came from the Caucasus.
LECTURE VI.
THE AUSTAFRICAN RACE 173
CONTENTS.--Former geography of Africa. Area of characterization
of the race. Its early extension. Divisions.
I. THE NEGRILLOS. Classical tales of Pygmies. Physical characters.
Habits. Relationship to Bushmen. Description
of Bushmen and Hottentots.
II. THE NEGROES. Home of the true negroes. 1. The Nilotic
Group. 2. The Sudanese Group. 3. The Senegambian
Group. 4. The Guinean Group.
III. THE NEGROIDS. Physical traits. Early admixtures.
1. The Nubian Group. 2. The Bantu Group.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE RACE. Low intellectual position.
Origin of negroes in the United States.
LECTURE VII.
THE ASIAN RACE 195
CONTENTS.--Physical geography of Asia. Physical traits of
the Race. Its branches.
I. THE SINITIC BRANCH. Subdivisions. 1. The Chinese.
Origin and early migrations. Psychical elements. Arts.
Religions. Philosophers. Late migrations. 2. The Thibetan
Group. Character. Physical traits. Tribes. 3. The Indo-Chinese
Group. Members. Character and Culture.
II. THE SIBIRIC BRANCH. Synonyms. Location. Physical
appearance. 1. The Tungusic Group. Members. Location.
Character. 2. Mongolic Group. Migrations. 3. The
Tataric Group. History. Language. Customs. 4. The
Finnic Group. Origin and migrations. Physical traits.
Boundaries of the Sibiric Peoples. The “Turanian”
theories. 5. The Arctic Group. Members. Location.
Physical traits. 6. The Japanese Group. Members. Location.
History. Culture. The Koreans.
LECTURE VIII.
INSULAR AND LITTORAL PEOPLES 221
CONTENTS.--Variability of islanders and coast peoples. Physical
geography of Oceanica. Ethnographic divisions.
I. THE NEGRITIC STOCK. Subdivisions. 1. The Negrito
Group. Members. Former extension. Physical aspect.
Culture. 2. The Papuan Group. Location. Physical
traits. Culture and language. 3. The Melanesian Group.
Physical traits. Habits. Languages. Ethnic affinities
of Papuas and Melanesians.
II. THE MALAYIC STOCK. Location. Subdivisions. Affinities
with the Asian Race and original home. 1. The Western or
Malayan Groups. Physical traits. Character. Extension.
Culture. Presence in Hindostan. 2. The Eastern or
Polynesian Group. Physical traits. Migrations. Character
and culture. Easter Island.
III. THE AUSTRALIC STOCK. Affinities between the Australians
and Dravidians. 1. The Australian Group. Tasmanians
and Australians. Physical traits. Culture. 2. The
Dravidian Group. Early extension. Members. Culture.
Languages.
LECTURE IX.
THE AMERICAN RACE 247
CONTENTS.--Peopling of America. Divisions. 1. The Arctic
Group. Members. Location. Character. 2. The North
Atlantic Group. Tinneh, Algonkins, Iroquois, Dakotas,
Muskokis, Caddoes, Shoshonees, etc. 3. The North Pacific
Group. Tlinkit, Haidahs, Californians, Pueblos. 4. The
Mexican Group. The Aztecs or Nahuas. Other nations.
5. The Inter-Isthmian Group. The Mayas. Their culture.
Other tribes. 6. The South Atlantic Group. The Caribs,
the Arawaks, the Tupis. Other tribes. 7. The South Pacific
Group. The Qquichuas or Peruvians. Their culture.
Other tribes.
LECTURE X.
PROBLEMS AND PREDICTIONS 277
CONTENTS.--I. ETHNOGRAPHIC PROBLEMS. 1. The problem of
acclimation. Various answers. Europeans in the tropics.
Austafricans in cold climates; in warm climates. The
Asian race. Tolerance of the American race. Theories of
acclimation. Conclusion. 2. The problem of amalgamation.
Effect on offspring. Mingling of white and black
races. Infertility. Mingling of colored races. Influence
of early and present social conditions. Is amalgamation
desirable? As applied to white race; to colored races.
3. The problem of civilization. Urgency of the problem.
Influence of civilization on savages. Failure of missionary
efforts. Cause of the failure. Suggestions.
II. THE DESTINY OF RACES. Extinction of races. 1. The
American race. Are the Indians dying out? Conflicting
statements. They are perishing. Diminution of insular
peoples; causes of fatality. The Austafrican race. The
Mongolian race stationary. Wonderful growth of the
Eurafrican race. Influence of the Semitic element. The
future Aryo-Semitic race.
Relation of ethnography to historical and political science.
INDEX OF AUTHORS 301
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 309
MAPS, SCHEMES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
* * * * *
PAGE
Figs. 1 and 2. Long and short skulls 21
Fig. 3. Lines of sutures in the skull 22
Fig. 4. Lines and angles of skull measurements 25
Fig. 5. Cross-sections of hairs 32
Fig. 6. Primary arrow-release 34
Fig. 7. Mediterranean arrow-release 34
Fig. 8. Mongolian arrow-release 35
* * * * *
Scheme of Principal Physical Elements 49
Scheme of Geologic Time during the Age of Man in the Eastern
Hemisphere 96
General Ethnographic Scheme 99
Scheme of the Eurafrican Race: South Mediterranean Branch 104
Scheme of the Eurafrican Race: North Mediterranean Branch 140
Scheme of Aryac Migration 153
Scheme of the Austafrican Race 174
Scheme of the Asian Race 194
Scheme of Insular and Littoral Peoples 220
* * * * *
Outlines of the Eastern Hemisphere in the Early Quaternary 88
Ethnic Chart of the Eurafrican Race 112
Ethnic Chart of Africa 176
Ethnic Chart of Eurasia and Asia 198
Ethnic Chart of Hindostan 244
Indian Tribes of the United States 256
LECTURES ON ETHNOGRAPHY.
LECTURE I.
THE PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF ETHNOGRAPHY.
CONTENTS.--Differences and resemblances in individuals and races
the basis of Ethnography. The _Bones_. Craniology. Its limited
value. Long and short skulls. Sutures. Inca bone. The orbital
index. The nasal index. The maxillary and facial angles. The
cranial capacity. The teeth. The iliac bones. Length of the arms.
The flattened tibia. The projecting heel. The heart line. The
Color. Its extent; cause; scale of colors. Color of the eyes. The
Hair. Shape in cross section; abundance. The muscular structure;
anomalies in; muscular habits; arrow releases. Steatopygy. Stature
and proportion; the “canon of proportion;” special senses; the
color sense. Ethnic relations of the sexes. Correlation of physical
traits to vital powers. Causes of the fixation of ethnic traits.
Climate; food supply; natural selection; conscious selection; the
physical ideal; sexual preference; abhorrence of incest; exogamous
marriages. Causes of variation in types. The mingling of races.
Physical criteria of racial superiority. Review of physical
elements.
That no two persons are identical in appearance is such a truism that
we are apt to overlook its significance. The parent can rarely be
recognized from the traits of the child, the brother from those of the
sister, the family from its members.
On the other hand, the individual peculiarities become lost in those of
the race. It is a common statement that to our eyes all Chinamen look
alike, or that one cannot distinguish an Indian “buck” from a “squaw.”
Yet you recognize very well the one as a Chinaman, the other as an
Indian. The traits of the race thus overslaugh the variable characters
of the family, the sex or the individual, and maintain themselves
uniform and unalterable in the pure blood of the stock through all
experience.
This fact is the corner-stone of the science of Ethnography, whose
aim is to study the differences, physical and mental, between men _in
masses_, and ascertain which of these differences are least variable
and hence of most value in classifying the human species into its
several natural varieties or types.
In daily life and current literature the existence of such varieties
is fully recognized. The European and African, or White and Black
races, are those most familiar to us; but the American Indian and the
Mongolian are not rare, and are recognized also as distinct from each
other and ourselves. These common terms for the races are not quite
accurate; but they illustrate a tendency to identify the most prominent
types of the species with the great continental areas, and in this
I shall show that the popular judgment is in accord with scientific
reasoning.
If an ordinary observer were asked what the traits are which fix the
racial type in his mind, he would certainly omit many which are highly
esteemed by the man of science. He would have nothing to say, for
instance, about the internal structures or organs, because they are not
visible; but in approaching the subject from a scientific direction,
we must lay most stress upon these, as their peculiarities decide the
external traits which strike the eye.
Nor does the casual observer note the mental or physical differences
which exist between the races whom he recognizes; yet these are
not less permanent and not less important than those which concern
the physical economy only. In both these directions the student of
ethnography as a science must pursue careful researches.
In the present lecture I shall pass in review the physical elements
held to be most weighty in the discrimination of racial types; and,
first, those relating to
_The Bones._--Most important are the measurements of the skull, that
science called _craniology_, or _craniometry_.
Ethnologists who are merely anatomists have made too much of this
science. They have applied it to the exclusion of other elements, and
have given it a prominence which it does not deserve. The shape of the
skull is no distinction of race in the individual; only in the mass,
in the average of large numbers, has it importance. Even here its
value is not racial. Within the limits of the same people, as among
the Slavonians, for example, the most different skulls are found, and
even the pure-blood natives of some small islands in the Pacific Ocean
present widely various forms.[1]
Experiments on the lower animals prove that the skull is easily moulded
by trifling causes. Darwin found that he could produce long, or short,
or non-symmetrical skulls in rabbits by training.[2] The shape also
bears a relation to stature. As a general rule short men have short or
rounded heads, tall men have long heads. The longest skulled nation in
Europe are the Norwegians, who are also the tallest; the roundest are
the Auvergnats, who, of all the European whites, are the shortest.
Nevertheless, employed cautiously, in large averages, and with a
careful regard for all the other ethnic elements, the measurements of
the skull are extremely useful as accessory data of comparison.
Some craniologists have run up these measurements to more than a
hundred; but those worth mentioning in this connection are but few.
There is, first, the proportion which the length of the head has to
its breadth. This makes the distinction between long, medium and broad
skulls, “dolicho-cephalic,” “meso-cephalic,” and “brachy-cephalic.” In
the medium skull the transverse bears to the longitudinal diameter the
proportion of about 80:100. The proportion 75:100 would make quite a
long skull, and 85:100 quite a broad skull, the extreme variations not
exceeding 70:100-90:100. (Figs. 1 and 2.)
[Illustration: FIGS. 1 AND 2.--Long and Short Skulls.]
The Asiatic race or typical Mongolians are generally brachy-cephalic,
the Eskimos and African negroes dolicho-cephalic; while the whites of
Europe and American Indians present great diversity.
The lengthening of the skull may be anteriorly or posteriorly, and
this is probably more significant of brain power than its width. In
the black race the lengthening is occipital, that is at the rear,
indicating a preponderance of the lower mental powers.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Lines of Sutures in the Skull.]
The height of the skull is another measurement which is much respected
by craniologists; but they are far from agreed as to the points from
which the lines shall be drawn, so that it is difficult to compare
their results.[3] The “sutures,” or lines of union between the several
bones of the skull, present indications of great value. In the lower
races they are much simpler than in the higher, and they become
obliterated earlier in life; the bones of the skull thus uniting into
a compact mass and preventing further expansion of the cavity occupied
by the brain.[4] (Fig. 3.) Occasionally small separated bones are found
in these sutures, more frequently in some races than in others. One
of these, toward the back of the head, occurs so constantly in certain
American tribes that it has been named the “Inca bone.”[5]
In many savage tribes there are artificial deformations of the skull,
which render it useless as a means of comparison. The “Flathead
Indians” are an example, and many Peruvian skulls are thus pressed
out of shape. It is singular that this violence to such an important
organ does not seem to be attended with any injurious result on the
intellectual powers.
The orbit of the eyes is another feature which varies in races. The
proportion of the short to the long diameter furnishes what is known as
the “orbital index.” The Mongolians present nearest a circular orbit,
the proportion being sometimes 93:100; while the lowest range has been
found in skulls from ancient French cemeteries, presenting an index
of 61:100. The latter are technically called “microsemes;” the former
“megasemes,” while the mean are “mesosemes.”[6]
In a similar manner the aperture of the nostrils varies and constitutes
quite an important element of comparison known as the “nasal index.”
Where this aperture is narrow, the nose is thin and prominent; when
broad, the nose is large and flat. The former are “leptorhinian,” the
latter “platyrhinian,” while the medium size is “mesorhinian.” This
division coincides closely with that of the chief races. Almost all
the white race are leptorhinian, the negroes platyrhinian, the true
Asiatics mesorhinian. The Eskimos have the narrowest nasal aperture,
the Bushmen the widest.
The projection of the maxillaries, or upper and lower jaws, beyond
the line of the face, is a highly significant trait. When well marked
it forms the “prognathic,” when slight the “orthognathic” type. It is
much more observable in the black than in the white race, and is more
pronounced in the old than in the young. It is considered to correspond
to a stronger development of the merely animal instincts.
The relation of the lower to the upper part of the head is measured
mainly by two angles, the one the “maxillary,” the other the “facial”
angle. The former is the angle subtended by lines drawn from the most
projecting portion of the maxillaries to the most prominent points
of the forehead above and the chin below. (The angle M G S in the
accompanying diagram, Fig. 4.) This supplies data for two important
elements, the prognathism and the prominence of the chin. The latter
is an essential feature of man. None of the lower animals possesses a
true chin, while man is never without one. The more acute the maxillary
angle, the less of chin is there, and the more prognathic the subject.
The averages run as follows:
The European white 160°.
The African negro 140°.
The Orang-outang 110°.
[Illustration: Fig. 4.--Lines and angles of skull measurement.]
The facial angle is that subtended by the same line, from the most
prominent point of the upper jaw to the most prominent part of the
forehead, and a second line drawn horizontally through the center
of the aperture of the ear. (The lines M G, D N.) It expresses the
relative prominence of the forehead and capacity of the anterior
portion of the brain. The more acute this angle, the lower is the
brain capacity. The following are its averages:
The European white 80°.
The African negro 70°. to 75°.
The Orang-outang 40°.
The amount of brain matter contained in a skull is called its “cerebral
or cranial capacity.” This is proved by investigation to average less
in the dark than in the light races, and in the same race less in
the female than in the male sex. Estimated in cubic centimetres the
extremes are about 1250 cub. cent. in the Australians and Bushmen to
1600 cub. cent. in well-developed Europeans. We cannot regard this
measurement as a constant exponent of intellectual power, as many men
with small brains have possessed fine intellects; but as a general
feature it certainly is indicative of brain weight, and therefore of
relative intelligence. The average human brain weighs 48 ounces, while
that of a large gorilla is not over 20 ounces.
The _teeth_ offer several points of difference in races. In the negro
they are unusually white and strong, and in nearly all the black
people (Australians, Soudanese, Melanesians, etc.), the “wisdom teeth”
are generally furnished with three separate fangs, and are sound,
while among whites they have only two fangs, and decay early. The
most ancient jaws exhumed in Europe present the former character. The
prominence of the canine teeth is a peculiarity of some tribes, while
in others the canines are not conical, but resemble the incisors.
The _size_ of the teeth has also been asserted to be an index of race,
and an effort has been made to classify peoples into small-toothed
(microdonts), medium-toothed (mesodonts), and large-toothed
(megadonts).[7] But this scheme includes in the first mentioned class
the Polynesians with the Europeans, and in the second the African negro
with the Chinese, which looks as if the plan has little value.
The milk-teeth have a much closer resemblance to those of the apes than
the second dentition, and some naturalists have thought that the forms
of the second teeth point often to reversion and are characteristic of
races, but this has not been proved.
The teeth and the period of dentition have been studied in man with
the view to show that certain races more than others retain the dental
forms of the lower animals, but the latest investigations go rather to
overthrow than to support these theories.[8]
Turning to the other bones of the skeleton, I shall note a few
peculiarities said to be ethnic. The skeleton of a negro usually
presents iliac bones more vertical than those of a white man, and the
basin is narrower. This peculiarity is measured by what is called the
“pelvic index,” by which is meant the ratio of the transverse to the
longitudinal diameter. The average ratio is about 90 or 95 to 100.
Another trait of a lower osteology is the unusual length of the arms.
This is found to depend upon the relative elongation of the fore-arm
and its principal bones, the radius and ulna. From comparisons which
have been instituted between the negro and the white, it appears that
the proportionate length of their arms is as 78 to 72. The long arms
are characteristic of the higher apes and the unripe fetus, and belong,
therefore, to a lower phase of development than that reached by the
white race.
There is also a peculiarity among many lower peoples in the shape of
the shin-bone or tibia. Usually when cut in cross-section, the ends
present a triangular surface; but in certain tribes, and in some
ancient remains from the caves, the cross-section is elliptical,
showing that the tibia has been flattened (platycnemic). This was long
regarded as a sign of ethnic inferiority, but of late years the opinion
of anatomists has undergone a change, and they attribute it to the
special use of some of the muscles of the leg.
The heel-bone, the os calcis or calcaneum, is currently believed to
be longer and project further backward in the negro than in the white
man. There is no doubt of the projection of the heel, and it is typical
of the true negro race, but it does not seem to be owing to the size
of the bone, as an examination of a series of calcanca in both races
proves. The lengthening is apparent only, and is due to the smallness
of the calf and the slenderness of the main tendon, the “tendon of
Achilles,” immediately above the heel.[9]
With the pithecoid forms of the bones is often associated another
simian mark. The line in the hand known to chiromancy as the “heart”
line, in all races but the negro ceases at the base of the middle
finger, but in his race, as in the ape, it often extends quite across
the palm.
The bones offer the most enduring, but not the most obvious
distinctions of races. The latter are unquestionably those presented by
_The Color._--This it is which first strikes the eye, and from which
the most familiar names of the types have been drawn. The black and
white, the yellow, the red and the brown races, are terms far older
than the science of ethnography, and have always been employed in its
terminology.
Why it is that these different hues should indelibly mark whole races,
is not entirely explained. The pigment or coloring matter of the skin
is deposited from the capillaries on the surface of the dermis or true
skin, and beneath the epidermis or scarf skin.[10] I have seen a negro
so badly scalded that the latter was detached in large fragments, and
with it came most of his color, leaving the spot a dirty light brown.
The coloration of the negro, however, extends much beyond the skin. It
is found in a less degree on all his mucous membrane, in his muscles,
and even in the pia mater and the grey substance of his brain.
The effort has been made to measure the colors of different peoples by
a color scale. One such was devised by Broca, presenting over thirty
shades, and another by Dr. Radde, in Germany; but on long journeys, or
as furnished by different manufacturers, these scales undergo changes
in the shades, so that they have not proved of the value anticipated.
As to the physiological cause of color, you know that the direct action
of the sun on the skin is to stimulate the capillary action, and lead
to an increased deposit of pigment, which we call “tan.” This pigment
is largely carbon, a chemical element, principally excreted by the
lungs in the form of carbonic oxide. When from any cause, such as a
peculiar diet, or a congenital disproportion of lungs to liver, the
carbonic oxide is less rapidly thrown off by the former organs, there
will be an increased tendency to pigmentary deposit on the skin. This
is visibly the fact in the African blacks, whose livers are larger in
proportion to their lungs than in any other race.[11]
While all the truly black tribes dwell in or near the tropics, all
the arctic dwellers are dark, as the Lapps, Samoyeds and Eskimos;
therefore, it is not climate alone which has to do with the change. The
Americans differ little in color among themselves from what part soever
of the continent they come, and the Mongolians, though many have lived
time immemorial in the cold and temperate zone, are never really white
when of unmixed descent.
A practical scale for the colors of the skin is the following:
{1. Black.
Dark. {2. Dark brown, reddish undertone.
{3. Dark brown, yellowish undertone.
{1. Reddish.
Medium. {
{2. Yellowish (olive).
{1. White, brown undertone (grayish).
White. {2. “ yellow undertone.
{3. “ rosy undertone.
The color of the _eyes_ should next have attention. Their hue is very
characteristic of races and of families. Light eyes with dark skins are
rare exceptions. Other things equal, they are lighter in men than in
women. Extensive statistics have been collected in Europe to ascertain
the prevalence of certain colors, and instructive results have been
obtained.[12] The division usually adopted is into dark and light eyes.
{1. Black.
Dark eyes. {
{2. Brown.
{1. Light brown (hazel).
Light eyes. {2. Gray.
{3. Blue.
The eye must be examined at some little distance so as to catch the
total effect.
Next in the order of prominence is
_The Hair._--Indeed, Haeckel and others have based upon its character
the main divisions of mankind. That of some races is straight, of
others more or less curled. This difference depends upon the shape
of the hairs in cross-section. The more closely they assimilate true
cylinders, the straighter they hang; while the flatter they are, the
more they approach the appearance of wool. (Fig. 5.) The variation
of the two diameters (transverse and longitudinal) is from 25:100 to
90:100. The straightest is found among the Malayans and Mongolians; the
wooliest among the Hottentots, Papuas and African negroes. The white
race is intermediate, with curly or wavy hair. It is noteworthy that
all woolly-haired peoples have also long, narrow heads and protruding
jaws.
[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Cross Sections of Hairs.]
The amount of hair on the face and body is also a point of some
moment. As a rule, the American and Mongolian peoples have little,
the Europeans and Australians abundance. Crossing of races seems to
strengthen its growth, and the Ainos of the Japanese Archipelago, a
mixed people, are probably the hairiest of the species. The strongest
growth on the head is seen among the Cafusos of Brazil, a hybrid of the
Indian and negro.
_The Muscular Structure._--The development of the muscular structure
offers notable differences in the various races. The blacks, both in
Africa and elsewhere, have the gastrocnemii or calf muscles of the
leg very slightly developed; while in both them and the Mongolians
the facial muscles have their fibres more closely interwoven than the
whites, thus preventing an equal mobility of facial expression.
The anomalies of the muscular structure seem about as frequent in one
race as in another. The most of them are regressive, imitating the
muscles of the apes, monkeys, and lower mammals. Indeed, a learned
anatomist has said that the abnormal anatomy of the muscles supplies
all the gaps which separate man from the higher apes, as all the simian
characteristics reappear from time to time in his structure.[13]
Certain motions or positions, such as I may call “muscular habits,” are
characteristic of extensive groups of tribes. The method of resting is
one such. The Japanese squats on his hams, the Australian stands on one
leg, supporting himself by a spear or pole, and so on. The methods of
arrow-release have been profitably studied by Professor E. S. Morse. He
finds them so characteristic that he classifies them ethnographically,
with reference to savagery and civilization, and locality. The three
most important are the primary, the Mediterranean, and the Mongolian
releases. The first is that of many savage tribes, the second was
practiced principally by the white race, the last by the Mongolians and
their neighbors. (Figs. 6, 7, 8.) The last two are the most effective,
and thus gave superiority in combat.
[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Primary Arrow-Release.]
[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Mediterranean Arrow-Release.]
Allied to muscular variation are the peculiar deposits of fatty tissue
in certain portions of the system. The Hottentots are remarkable for
the prominence of the gluteal region, imparting to their figure a
singular projection posteriorly. It is called “steatopygy,” and appears
to have been, in part at least, a cultivated deformity, regarded
among them as a beauty. The thick lips of the negro, and the long and
pendent breasts of the Australian women, are other examples of ethnic
hypertrophies.
[Illustration: Fig. 8.--Mongolian Arrow-Release.]
_Stature and Proportion._--Differences in stature are tribal, but not
racial. The smallest peoples known, the Negrillos, the Aetas, the
Lapps, belong to different races, as do the tallest, the Patagonians,
the Polynesians, the Anglo-Americans. The researches of Paolo Riccardi
and others prove that stature is correlated with nutrition; the better
the food, other things being equal, the taller the men.[14] It is also
markedly hereditary; the stature of children will average that of their
parents.
What is called the “canon of proportions” of the human body varies
with the race and the nation. There is indeed an ideal, an artistic
canon, which the sculptor or the painter seeks to body forth in his
productions; and this seems in close conformity with an extensive
average of the proportions of the highest peoples; but it is never
found in individuals, and it is essentially unlike in man and woman,
in youth and age, in the blonde and brunette.[15] Nor is the ideal of
the artist also that which is consonant with the greatest muscular
development or highest powers of endurance.
_Special Senses._--It cannot be said that the different races display
positive discrepancies in the special senses. Their development appears
to depend on cultivation, and all races respond equally to equal
training. There is, to be sure, a higher musical sense in the native
African than in the native American, but quite as much difference is
seen between European nations.
Much has been written of the color-sense as a trait of nations. It has
been said that some tribes, some races, appreciate hues more keenly
than others; that within historic times marked gains in this respect
are noticeable. I think these statements are incorrect. The savage of
any race distinguishes precisely the difference of hues when it is to
his material interest so to do; but concerns himself not at all about
colors which have no effect on his life. He is well acquainted with
the colors of the animals he hunts, and has a word for every shade of
hue. This proves that his color-sense is as acute as that of civilized
people, and merely lacks specific training.
_Ethnic Relations of the Sexes._--There are some curious facts in
reference to the relative position of the sexes in different peoples.
As a rule the expression of sex in form and feature is less in the
lower than in the higher races. Travelers frequently refer to the
difficulty of distinguishing the men from the women among the American
Indians or the Chinese. Investigate the fact, and you will find that
it is not that the women are less feminine in appearance, but the men
less masculine. In other words, the expression of sex in such peoples
is less in man than in woman. This seems to be true also of the
highest ideals of manhood in artistic conception. The Greek Apollo,
the traditional Christ, present a feminine type of the male. This was
carried to its excess in the Greek Hermaphrodite.
The reason for this approximation to the female in art-ideals is
probably the zoological fact that the law of beauty in the human
species is the reverse of that in all the other higher mammals, the
female sex with us being the handsomer. This also becomes more evident
in the comparison of the best developed peoples.
On the other hand, the muscular force of the sexes presents the
greatest contrast in nations of the highest culture. The average
European woman of twenty-five or thirty has one-third less muscular
power than the average European man. But among the Afghans, the
Patagonians, the Druses and other tribes, the women are as tall and as
strong as the men; and in Siam, Ashanti, Ancient Gaul, and elsewhere,
not only the field-laborers but the soldiers were principally women,
selected because of their greater physical force and courage.
As the value of mere brute force in a social organization lessens in
comparison to mental powers, the condition of woman improves, and her
faculties find appropriate play. Her brain capacity, though absolutely
less, is relatively more than man’s. That is, the difference of the
whole average weight of woman and man is greater in proportion than the
difference of their brain weights.
It is believed, also, that the viability or prospect of life in woman
is greater in higher than in lower peoples; and generally greater than
in men. European statistics show that 106 boys are born to 100 girls:
but at twelve years of age the sexes are equal, the boys suffering a
greater mortality. At eighty years of age, there are nearly three women
living to one man, indicating a superior longevity.
_Correlation of Physical Traits to Vital Powers._--The physical
traits are correlated to the physiological functions in such a manner
as profoundly to influence the destiny of nations. They enable or
disable man with reference to the climatic and other conditions of his
surroundings. For instance, certain races can support given temperature
better than others. The intense heat and humidity of Central Africa or
Southern India are destructive to the pure whites, while the climate
north of the fortieth parallel soon exterminates the blacks. The food
on which the Australian thrives destroys the digestive powers of
the European. Exemption and liability to diseases differ noticeably
in races. The white race is more liable to yellow fever, malarial
diseases, syphilis, scarlet fever and sunstroke; the colored races to
measles, tuberculosis, leprosy, elephantiasis, and pneumonia.
Indeed, from the physical point of view, the pure white is weaker
than the dark races, worse prepared for the combat of life, with
inferior viability. This has been shown by the careful researches of
statisticians.[16] But in the white this is more than compensated by
the development of the nervous system and the intellectual power. He
can bear greater mental strain than any other race, and the activity
of his mind supplies him with means to overcome the inferiority of his
body, and thus places him at the head of the whole species.
The _tolerance of disease_ is an obscure but momentous element in the
comparison of races. It is almost a proverb among the Spanish-American
physicians that “when an Indian falls sick, he dies.” The greater
longevity of the European peoples is due to their ability to support
disease long and frequently, without succumbing to it. On the other
hand, surgical injuries, wounds and cuts, appear to heal more rapidly
among savage peoples.[17] It is clear that in civilized conditions this
is less important than tolerance.
_The Causes of the Fixation of Ethnic Traits._--These causes are
mainly related to climate and the food-supply. The former embraces the
questions of temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure (altitude),
malarial or zymotic poisons, and the like. All these bear directly upon
the relative activity of the great physiological organs, the lungs,
heart, liver, skin and kidneys, and to their action we must undoubtedly
turn for the origin of the traits I have named. On the food-supply,
liquid and solid, whether mainly animal, fish or vegetable, whether
abundant or scanty, whether rich in phosphates and nitrogenous
constituents or the reverse, depend the condition of the digestive
organs, the nutrition of the individual, and the development of
numerous physical idiosyncrasies. Nutrition controls the direction of
organic development, and it is essentially on arrested or imperfect, in
contrast to completed development, that the differences of races depend.
These are the physiological and generally unavoidable influences which
went to the fixation of racial types. They are those which placed early
man under the dominion of natural, unconscious evolution, like all the
lower animals. To them may be added natural selection from accidental
variations becoming permanent when proving of value in the struggle
for existence, as shown in the black hue of equatorial tribes, special
muscular development, etc.
But I do not look on these as the main agents in the fixation of
special traits. No doubt such agencies primarily evolved them, but
their cultivation and perpetuation were distinctly owing to _conscious_
selection in early man. Our species is largely outside the general laws
of organic evolution, and that by virtue of the self-consciousness
which is the privilege of it alone among organized beings.
This conscious selection was applied in two most potent directions,
the one to maintaining the _physical ideal_, the other toward _sexual
preference_.
As soon as the purely physical influences mentioned had impressed
a tendency toward a certain type on the early community, this was
recognized, cultivated and deepened by man’s conscious endeavors. Every
race, when free from external influence, assigns to its highest ideal
of manly or womanly beauty its special racial traits, and seeks to
develop these to the utmost. African travelers tell us that the negroes
of the Soudan look with loathing on the white skin of the European;
and in ancient Mexico when children were born of a very light color,
as occasionally happened, they were put to death. On the other hand
the earliest records of the white race exalt especially the element of
whiteness. The writer of the Song of Solomon celebrates his bride as
“fairest among women,” with a neck “like a tower of ivory;”[18] and one
of the oldest of Irish hero-tales, the _Wooing of Emer_, chants the
praises of “Tara, the whitest of maidens.”[19] Though both Greeks and
Egyptians were of the dark type of the Mediterranean peoples, their
noblest gods, Apollo and Osiris, were represented “fair in hue, and
with light or golden hair.”[20]
The persistent admiration of an ideal leads to its constant cultivation
by careful preservation and sexual selection. Thus the peoples who have
little hair on the face and body, as most Chinese and American Indians,
usually do not like any, and carefully extirpate it. The negroes prefer
a flat nose, and a child which develops one of a pointed type has it
artificially flattened. In Melanesia if a child is born of a lighter
hue than is approved by the village, it is assiduously held over the
smoke of a fire in order to blacken it. The custom of destroying
infants markedly aberrant from the national type is nigh universal in
primitive life. Such usages served to fix and perpetuate the racial
traits.
A yet more powerful factor was _sexual preference_. This worked in a
variety of ways. If is well known to stock breeders that the closer
animals are bred in-and-in, that is, the nearer the relationship of
father and mother, the more prominently the traits of the parents
appear in their children and become fixed in the breed. It is
evident that in the earliest epoch of the human family, the closest
inter-breeding must have prevailed without restriction, as it does in
every species of the lower animals. By its influences the racial traits
were rapidly strengthened and indelibly impressed. This, however, was
long before the dawn of history, for it is a most remarkable fact that
never in historic times has a tribe been known that allowed incestuous
relations, unless as in ancient Egypt and Persia, for a sacrificial or
ceremonial purpose. The lowest Australians, the degraded Utes, look
with horror on the union of brother and sister. The general principle
of marriage in savage races is that of “exogamy,” marriage outside
the clan or family, the latter being counted in the female line only.
This strange but universal abhorrence has been explained by Darwin as
primarily the result of sexual indifference arising between members
of the same household, and the high zest of novelty in that appetite.
Whatever the cause, the consequences will easily be seen. The racial
traits once fixed in the period before this abhorrence arose would
remain largely stationary afterwards, and by exogamous marriages would
be rendered uniform over a wide area.
This form of conscious selection has properly been rated as one of
the prime factors in the problem of race differentiation.[21] The
apparently miscellaneous and violent union of the sexes in savage
tribes is in fact governed by the most stringent traditional laws, and
their confused cohabitations are so only to the mind of the European
observer, not to the tribal conscience.[22]