Skin tawny; hair black, soft, curled, thick, and abundant; head rather
narrow; forehead slightly arched; cheek-bones not prominent, upper jaw
rather projecting. Face prominent at its lower part; the features viewed
in profile more distinct; the nose full, broad, bottled at its point;
mouth large.
This comprehends the inhabitants of the Pacific Ocean, of the Marian,
Philippine, Molucca, and Sunda isles, and of the Peninsula of Malacca.
* * * * *
The Caucasian variety derives its name from _Mount Caucasus_, where we
meet with a beautiful race--the Georgians; and because, so far as the
imperfect light of history and tradition can guide us, the original abode
of the species appears to have been in that quarter. In this class are
included all the ancient and modern Europeans; the Assyrians, Medes,
Chaldeans, Sarmatians, Scythians, and Parthians; the Philistines,
Phoenicians, Jews; the Turks, Persians, Arabians, and Hindoos of high
caste. Blumenbach is inclined to believe that the primitive human race
belonged to this variety. In support of this opinion it may be stated,
that the part of Asia which seems to have been the cradle of the race has
always been, and still is, inhabited by tribes of this formation; and the
inhabitants of Europe in great part may be traced back for their origin to
the West of Asia.
Are all these various tribes, brethren descended from one stock? or must
we trace them to more than one? The physiologists who have ventured to
express the latter opinion have been stigmatized by intolerance and blind
bigotry as atheists and unbelievers; yet this question belongs to the
domain of the naturalist, and the philosopher has an unqualified right to
moot it without incurring the heinous charge of infidelity. To form an
opinion on this difficult subject, it will be necessary, as Lawrence
justly observes, to ascertain carefully all the differences that exist
between the various races of men; to compare them with the diversities
observed among animals; to apply to them all the light which human and
comparative physiology can supply, and to draw our inferences concerning
their nature and causes from all the direct information and all the
analogies which these considerations may unfold. "It is quite clear,"
continues the same ingenious writer, "that the Mosaic account makes all
the inhabitants of the world descended from _Adam_ and _Eve_. The entire,
or even the partial inspiration of the various writings comprehended in
the Old Testament, has been and is doubted by many persons, including
learned divines and distinguished Oriental and Biblical scholars. The
account of the creation, and subsequent events, has the allegorical
figurative character common to Eastern compositions, and it is
distinguished amongst the cosmogonies by a simple grandeur and natural
sublimity, as the rest of these writings are by appropriate beauties in
their respective parts. The representation of all the animals being
brought before Adam in the first instance, and subsequently of their all
being collected in the ark, if we are to understand them as applied to the
living inhabitants of the whole world, is zoologically impossible. How
could the polar bear have traversed the torrid zone? If we are to believe
that the original creation comprehended only a male and female of each
species, or that one pair only was saved from an universal deluge, the
difficulties are increased; the carnivorous animals must have perished
with hunger, or destroyed most of the other species." On this obscure
subject Adelung has expressed himself with much ingenuity: "Asia has been
at all times regarded as the country where the human race had its
beginning, and from which its increase was spread over the rest of the
globe. Tracing the people up to tribes, and the tribes to families, we are
conducted at last, if not by history, at least by the tradition of all old
people, to a single pair, from which tribes and nations have been
successively produced. What was the first family, and the first people
descended from it?--where was it settled?--and how was it extended so as
to fill the four large divisions of the globe? It is a question of fact,
and must be answered by History. But History is silent: her first books
have been destroyed by time; and the few lines preserved by _Moses_ are
rather calculated to excite than to satisfy our curiosity.
"We must fancy to ourselves this first tribe endowed with all human
faculties, but not possessing all knowledge and experience, the subsequent
acquisition of which is left to the natural operation of time and
circumstances. As Nature would not unnecessarily expose her first-born and
inexperienced son to conflicts and dangers, the place of his early abode
would be so selected that all his wants could be easily satisfied, and
every thing essential to his existence be readily procured. He would be
placed, in short, in a garden of paradise. Such a country is found in
central Asia, between the 30th and 50th degrees of north latitude, and the
90th and 110th of east longitude (from Ferro); a spot which in respect to
its height, can only be compared to the lofty plains of Quito in South
America. Here, too, all the animals are found wild, which man has tamed
for his use, and carried with him over the whole earth."
This ingenious historical investigation points out the east as the
earliest and original seat of our species, the source of our domesticated
animals and our principal vegetable food; but it by no means decides
whether the globe was peopled by one or several original stocks.
The startling nature of this question on the first view of the subject
must induce us to consider the circumstance of these five distinct
varieties arising from one stock as miraculous; but when we compare them
with the corresponding difference in animals, we can easily come to the
conclusion that the various races of human beings are only to be regarded
as varieties of a single species, without supposing the intervention of
any supernatural agency.
The sceptic Voltaire, who evinced more wit than learning in his endeavours
to invalidate Scriptural tradition by ridicule, thus expresses himself:
"Il n'est permis qu'a un aveugle de douter que les blancs, les negres, les
albinos, les Hottentots, les Lapons, les Chinois, les Americains, soient
des races entierement differentes;" but had this philosopher been better
versed in zoology and physiology, he would not have made so groundless an
assertion. "Analogical and direct facts," says Dr. Elliotson, "lead to the
conclusion that none of the differences among mankind are so great as to
require the belief of their originality." A contrary opinion, however,
should not be stigmatized by bigotry, for Locke has justly observed that
only matters above human reason are the proper subjects of revelation; and
Bacon has also maintained that religious and philosophical inquiries
should be kept separate, and not pompously united. Dr. Bostock, than whom
no man could be less sceptical, plainly admits that we do not find that
the writer of the book of Genesis lays claim to any supernatural source of
information with respect to natural phenomena, while the whole tenour of
his work seems to show that on such topics he adopted the opinions which
were current among his contemporaries.
The causes of the difference of our species have been the subject of as
great a discrepance in opinion. Most of the Greek and Roman Historians
have attributed it to the influence of climate; and amongst the moderns,
Montaigne, Montesquieu, Buffon, and Zimmerman, have considered the
modification of the individual and the degeneration of the offspring as
the result of this external agency. Lord Kaimes, Hume, and many other
philosophers, have entertained a contrary opinion. No doubt, the influence
of climate may materially affect colour, stature, hair, features, and even
the moral and intellectual character; but it must be considered as
inadequate to act upon conformation. The prevalence of light colours in
the animals of polar regions is well known: the arctic fox, the white
bear, the snow-bunting, are striking instances of this peculiarity; but
these circumstances are purely superficial. The skulls of these
individuals are similar to those of the Europeans; nay, it is well known
that light races are found among dark nations, and many protected parts of
the body are blacker than those which are exposed. Buchanan tells us, that
the Jews in Cochin are divided into white and black classes, though born
under the same parallel; the white Jews having been known there for
upwards of one thousand seven hundred years. Dr. Shaw and Bruce describe a
race of fair people, near Mount Aurasius in Africa, with red hair and blue
eyes, and who are, according to tradition, descended from the Vandals. We
find the red Peruvian, the brown Malay, and the white Abyssinian in the
very zones peopled by jet black races. This influence of temperature upon
colour frequently varies according to the seasons. Pallas observed that
even in domestic animals, such as the horse and cow, the coat is of a
lighter colour in winter. The Siberian roe, red in summer, is white in the
winter; the fur of the sable and the martin is much deeper in the warm
months; and the squirrel and mustela nivalis, which become white in
Siberia and Russia, do not change their hue in Germany. The winter coat,
it has been observed by naturalists, is found far advanced in the
preparatory autumn. This bounteous provision of nature seems to have been
extended to the vegetable kingdom and it has been observed that the
pellicle of onions is much thicker on the approach of a severe winter than
on that of a more temperate season. But if further proof were necessary to
impugn this doctrine respecting climate, we may adduce the fact of a woman
having borne twins of different complexions, a white and a black. With all
due respect to the much-lamented Bishop Heber, we must receive with some
degree of hesitation his assertion that the Persian, Greek, Tartar, and
Arabian inhabitants of India, assume, in a few generations, without any
intercourse with the Hindoos, a deep blue tint, little lighter than that
of a negro; and that the Portuguese, during three hundred years' residence
in that climate, have assumed the blackness of a Kaffer. The same learned
prelate is of opinion that our European complexion was not primitive, but
rather that of an Indian; an intermediate tint is perhaps the most
agreeable to the eye and instinct of the majority of the human race. Dr.
Heber, perhaps, had not seen, in various Roman catholic treasures,
portraits of the Virgin Mary, painted, according to tradition, by St.
Luke, and in which she is represented as a negress.
That solar heat produces blackness of the integuments is an ancient
opinion, and is illustrated by Pliny, who tells us, "Aethiopes vicini
sideris vapore torreri, adustisque similes gigni, barba et capillo
vibrato, non est dubium." Buffon asserts that "climate may be regarded as
the chief cause of the different colours of man;" and Smith is of opinion
"that from the pole to the equator we observe a gradation in the
complexion nearly in proportion to the latitude of the country."
Blumenbach, under the same impression, endeavours to account for this
black tinge by a chemical illustration somewhat curious. He states that
the proximate cause of the dark colour is an abundance of carbon secreted
by the skin with hydrogen, precipitated and fixed by the contact of the
atmospheric oxygen. Our creoles, and the British inhabitants of India, may
esteem themselves particularly fortunate in not being subject to this
chemical operation!
On the other hand, it is well known that a black state of the skin has
been produced in white races under peculiar circumstances; and Le Cat and
Camper mention cases of women who turned dark during their pregnancy. It
would be idle to dwell further on the hypothetic illustrations regarding
this supposed operation of climate, which the observation of every
unprejudiced traveller can impugn. Yet the following remarks on the
subject by an American divine, the Rev. J. S. Smith are worthy of notice:
"In tracing the globe from the pole to the equator we observe a gradation
in the complexion nearly in proportion to the latitude of the country,
immediately below the arctic circle a high and sanguine colour prevails.
From this you descend to the mixture of red and white. Afterwards comes
the brown, the blue, the tawny, and at length the black as you proceed to
the line. The same distance from the sun, however, does not in any degree
indicate the same temperature of climate. Some secondary causes must be
taken into consideration, in connecting and limiting its influence. The
elevation of the land, its vicinity to the sea, the nature of the soil,
the state of cultivation, the course of the winds, and many other
circumstances enter into this view. Elevated and mountainous countries are
cool in proportion to their altitude above the level of the sea,
increasing to the ocean, just in opposite effects, in northern and
southern latitudes; for the ocean being of a more equal temperature than
the land, in one case corrects the cold, and in the other moderates the
heat. Ranges of mountains, such as the Apennines in Italy, and Taurus,
Caucasen, and Iman, in Asia, by interrupting the course of cold winds,
render the quite dry country below them warmer, and the countries above
them colder, than is equivalent to the proportionate difference of
latitude. The frigid zone, in Asia, is much wider than it is in Europe;
and that continent hardly knows a temperate zone."
Climate also receives some difference from the nature of the soil, and
some from the degree of cultivation; sand is susceptible of greater heat
than clay, and an uncultivated region shaded with forests and covered with
undrained marshes, is more frigid in northern and more temperate in
southern latitudes, than a country laid open to the direct and constant
action of the sun. History informs us that when Germany and Scythia were
bound in forests, the Romans often transported their armies across the
frozen Danube; but since the civilization of those barbarous regions, the
Danube rarely freezes.
Migration to other countries has also been adduced as one of the causes of
variety in mankind; but the permanency of the characteristic distinctions
of any race militates against this supposition. The physical character of
the Celts, who peopled the west of Europe at an early period, is still
observable in the Spaniard, most of the French, the native Welsh, the
Manks, and the Scotch Highlander; whereas the German race, who occupied
the more northern and eastern settlements, are still distinguished by
their transparent skin, rosy complexion, flaxen hair, and blue eyes; and
in Ireland, the race of the Danes and the Milesians can to this day be
recognised in their respective characters. Shaw and Bruce traced the
descendants of the Vandals who passed from Spain into Africa in the fifth
century; and, after a lapse of thirteen centuries, Bruce says that they
are "fair like the English, their hair red, and their eyes blue." Negroes
have been introduced into the New World for upwards of three centuries,
where, despite of a new clime and different habits, they still retain the
character of their race; and the Jews who have not intermarried out of
their nation, have preserved their features for nineteen centuries.
Not only do we observe the peculiarities of physical conformation
resisting the destructive or degenerating hand of time, but certain
imperfections in their faculties have been equally permanent in certain
tribes. It is a curious fact that the Mamelukes, who have resided in Egypt
for upwards of five hundred and fifty years, have never perpetuated their
subsisting issue. Volney observed, that there does not exist one single
family of them in the second generation; all their children perishing in
the first or second descent. The same observation applies to the Turks,
who can only secure the continuance of their families by marrying native
women, an union which the Mamelukes disdained. This singularity, remarked
by Volney, has been since confirmed by late travellers.
It will be found that the progress of domestication, the natural result of
civilized improvement, tends more materially to operate a wonderful change
in the animal conformation, than any other supposed agency. The head of
the domestic pig differs as much from that of the wild one as the Negro's
from the Caucasian's. At Padua, it has been observed that fowls have a
cranium perforated by numerous holes, and hollowed out like a shell. In
some countries, nay districts, cattle and sheep have or have not horns;
and in other instances sheep have so many of them as to have acquired the
epithet of _polycerateous_. Wild animals continuing to inhabit the place
that bore them, undergo little or no change, and their fossil remains and
skeletons are similar to the present species; but nothing can form a
stronger contrast to this specific uniformity than the numerous varieties
to be found in those races that have been crossed in breed and
domesticated by man. We could scarcely imagine that our sheep owe their
origin to the mouflon or argali, (_ovis ammon_,) an animal large in size,
fleet, and fierce. The sheep of Senegal and India are those that have
undergone the least degradation; while those of Barbary, Egypt, Arabia,
and Persia, have experienced greater degeneration. We daily see dogs
degenerate before our eyes, and it has not yet been satisfactorily
ascertained whether they arise from one or several species. Cuvier, in his
diligent researches, has concluded that our oxen do not originate in the
urus or bison of the ancients formerly found in various parts of Europe,
and still met with in the forests of Lithuania, and on the Carpathian and
Caucasian chains; but he is of opinion, from the examination of fossil
remains, that, like the camel and the dromedary, the species has been
destroyed by civilization: the causes of these changes do not appear to
operate by altering the parents but disposing them to produce offsprings
more or less dissimilar in colour, form, and disposition.
Dr. Prichard observes, that the negro slaves of the third and fourth
generation differ materially from the natives of Africa.
In opposition to this doctrine, which admits this wonderful degeneration
under the plastic influence of domestication, it has been shown that, as
far as we know, the lapse of ages has not produced any change in the
generality of animals. The zoological descriptions given by Aristotle
twenty-two centuries ago apply distinctly to the same species of the
present day, and every work of art in which these animals are represented
corroborates the fact. Geoffroy de St. Hilaire brought numerous mummies of
animals from the sepulchres of Egypt, and found no more difference between
their skeletons and the osseous conformation of the present races, than in
the relics of the human mummy and the bones of our contemporaries.
The following luminous conclusion of Lawrence illustrates the observation
of the foregoing fact: "If new characters are produced in the domestic
animals because they have been taken from their primitive condition, and
exposed to the operation of many, to them, unnatural causes,--if the pig
is remarkable among these for the number and degrees of his varieties,
because it has been the most exposed to causes of degeneration,--we shall
be at no loss to account for the diversities in man, who is, in the true,
though not in the ordinary sense of the word, more of a domesticated
animal than any other. We know the wild state of most of them, but we are
ignorant of the natural wild condition to which man was destined. Probably
there is no such state; because Nature having limited him in no
respect,--having fitted him for every kind of life, every climate, and
every variety of food,--has given him the whole earth for his abode, and
both the organized kingdoms for his nourishment. Yet, in the wide range
through which the scale of human cultivation extends, we may observe a
contrast between the two extremities, analogous to that which is seen in
the wild and tamed races of animals. The savage may be compared to the
former, which range the earth uncontrolled by man; civilized people to the
domesticated breeds of the same species, whose diversities of form and
colour are endless."
It is therefore obvious that the various causes which operate upon animals
in producing these alterations from the primitive race, although the
manner in which they act is unknown, are sufficiently evident to convince
us, by analogy, that they may account for similar phenomena in the human
race, without the gratuitous assumption of different original species,
tending to invalidate the Mosaic account of the creation. Despite the
witticisms of Voltaire and other philosophers on this subject, sound
philosophy teaches us to assign the same causes to the same effects
without calling in the adventitious aid of other possible influences; and
no difficulties prevent us from recognising the unity of the human
species, which are not applicable to all other animals.