Monogeny or Polygeny—Darwin—Existing Races—Colour—Hair—Skulls and Brains—Dolichocephali and Brachycephali—Jaws and Teeth—Stature—Other Tests—Isaac Taylor—Prehistoric Types in Europe—Huxley\'s Classification—Language no Test of Race—Egyptian Monuments—- Human and Animal Races unchanged for 6000 years—Neolithic Races—Pal?olithic—Different Races of Man as far back as we can trace—Types of Canstadt, Cro-Magnon, and Furfooz—Oldest Races Dolichocephalic—Skulls of Neanderthal and Spy—Simian Characters—Objections—Evidence confined to Europe—American Man—Calaveras Skull—Tertiary Man—Skull of Castelnedolo—Leaves Monogeny or Polygeny an open Question—Arguments on each side—Old Arguments from the Bible and Philology exploded—What Darwinian Theory requires—Animal Types traced up to the Eocene—Secondary Origins—Dog and Horse—Fertility of Races—Question of Hybridity—Application to Man—Difference of Constitutions—Negro and White—Bearing on Question of Migration—Apes and Monkeys—Question of Original Locality of Man—Asiatic Theory—Eur-African—American—Arctic—None based on sufficient Evidence—- Mere Speculations—Conclusion—Summary of Evidence as to Human Origins.
The immense antiquity of man upon earth having been established, other questions of great interest present themselves as to the origin of the race. These questions, however, no longer depend on positive facts of observation, like the discovery of pal?olithic remains in definite geological deposits, but on inference and conjecture from these and other observed facts, most of which are of comparatively recent date and hardly extend beyond the historical period.
392 Thus if we start with the existing state of things, we find a great variety of human races actually prevailing, located in different parts of the world, and of fundamental types so dissimilar as to constitute what in animal zoology would often be called separate species,[16] and yet fertile among themselves, and so similar in many physical and mental characters as to infer an origin from common ancestors. And we can infer from history that this was so to a great extent 6000 years ago, and that the length of time has been insufficient to produce any marked changes, either in physical or linguistic types of the different fundamental races.
Was this always so, and what inference can be drawn as to the much-disputed question between monogeny and polygeny, that is, between the theory of descent from a single pair in a single locality, and that of descent from several pairs, developed in different localities by parallel, but not strictly identical, lines of evolution?
This is a question which cannot be decided off-hand by à priori considerations. No doubt Darwinism points to the evolution of all life from primitive forms, and ultimately, perhaps, from the single simplest form of life in the cell or protoplasm. But this does not necessarily imply that the more highly specialized, and 393 what may be called the secondary forms of life, have all originated from single secondary centres, at one time and in one locality.
On the contrary, we have the authority of Darwin himself for saying that this is not a necessary consequence of his theory. In a letter to Bentham he says—"I dispute whether a new race or species is necessarily or even generally descended from a single or pair of parents. The whole body of individuals, I believe, became altered together—like our race-horses, and like all domestic breeds which are changed through unconscious selection by man."
The problem is, therefore, an open one, and can only be solved (or rather attacked, for in the present state of our knowledge a complete solution is probably impossible) by a careful induction from ascertained facts, ascending step by step from the present to the past, from the known to the unknown.
The first step is to have a clear idea of what actually exists at the present moment. There are an almost endless number of minor varieties of the human race, but none of them of sufficient importance to imply diversity of origin, with the exception of four, or at the most five or six fundamental types, which stand so widely apart that it is difficult to imagine that they are all descended from a common pair of ancestors. These are the white, yellow, and black races of the Old World, the copper-coloured of America, and perhaps the olive-coloured of Malaysia and Polynesia, and the pygmy races of Africa and Eastern Asia. The difficulty of supposing these races to have all sprung from a single pair will at once be apparent if we personify this pair under the name of Adam for the first man and Eve for 394 the first woman, and ask ourselves the question, what do we suppose to have been their colour?
But colour alone, though the most obvious, is by no means the sole criterion of difference of race. The evidence is cumulative, and other equally marked and persistent characters, both of physical structure and of physiological and mental peculiarities, stand out as distinctly as differences of colour in the great typical races. For instance, the hair is a very persistent index of race. When the section of it is circular, the hair is straight and lank; when flattened, woolly; and when oval, curly or wavy. Now these characters are so persistent that many of the best anthropologists have taken hair as the surest test of race. Everywhere the lank and straight hair and circular section go with the yellow and copper-coloured races; the woolly hair and flat section with the black; and the wavy hair and oval section with the white races.
The solid framework of the skeleton also affords very distinctive types of race, especially where it is looked at in a general way as applicable to great masses of pure races, and not to individuals of mixed race, like most Europeans. The skull is most important, for it affords the measure of the size and shape of the brain, which is the highest organ, and that on which the differentiation of man from the lower animals mainly depends. The size of the brain alone does not always afford a conclusive proof of mental superiority, for it varies with sex, height, and other individual characters, and often seems to depend more on quality than on quantity. Still, if we take general averages, we find that superior and civilized races have larger brains than inferior and savage ones. Thus the average brain of the European 395 is about 1500 cubic centimètres, while that of the Australian and Bushman does not exceed 1200.
The shape as well as the size of the skull affords another test of race which is often appealed to. The main distinction taken is between dolichocephalic and brachycephalic, or long and broad skulls. Here also we must look at general averages rather than at individuals, for there is often considerable variation within the same race, especially among the mesocephalic, or medium between the two extremes, which is generally the prevalent form where there has been much intermixture of races. But if we take widely different types there can be no doubt that the long or broad skull is a characteristic and persistent feature. The formation of the jaws and teeth affords another important test. Some races are what is called prognathous, that is, the jaws project, and the teeth are set in sockets sloping outwards, so that the lower part of the face approximates to the form of a muzzle; others are orthognathous, or have the jaws and teeth vertical. And the form of the chin seems to be wonderfully correlated with the general character and energy of the race. It is hard to say why, but as a matter of fact a weak chin generally denotes a weak, and a strong chin a strong, race or individual. Thus the chimpanzee and other apes have no chin, the negro and lower races generally have chins weak and receding. The races who, like the Iberians, have been conquered or driven from plains to mountains, have had poor chins; while their successive conquerors, of Aryan race,—Celts, Romans, Teutons, and Scandinavians,—might almost be classified by the prominence and solidity of this feature of the face.
396 Stature is another very persistent feature. The pygmy races of Equatorial Africa described by Stanley have remained the same since the early records of Egypt, while the pure Aryan races of the north temperate zone, Gauls, Germans, and Scandinavians, have from the first dawn of history amazed the shorter races of the south by their tall stature, huge limbs, blue eyes, and yellow hair. Here and there isolated tall races may be found where the race has become thoroughly acclimatized to a suitable environment, as among some negro tribes, and the Araucanian Indians of Patagonia; but as a rule the inferior races are short, the bulk of the civilized races of the world of intermediate stature, and the great conquering races of the north temperate zone decidedly tall.
Other tests are afforded by the shape of the eye-orbits and nasal bones, and other characters, all of which agree, in the words of Isaac Taylor in his Origin of the Aryans, in "exhibiting two extreme types—the African with long heads, long orbits, and flat hair; and the Mongolian with round heads, round orbits, and round hair. The European type is intermediate, the head, the orbit, and the hair being oval. In the East of Europe we find an approximation to the Asiatic type; in the South of Europe to the African."
Taking these prominent anthropological characters as tests, we find four distinct types among the earliest inhabitants of Europe, which can be traced back from historic to neolithic times. They consist of two long-headed and two short-headed races, and in each case one is tall and the other short. The dolichocephalic are recognized everywhere throughout Western Europe and on the Mediterranean basin, including North Africa, as 397 the oldest race, and they are thought still to survive in the original type in some of the people of Wales and Ireland and the Spanish Basques; while they doubtless form a large portion, intermixed with other races, of the blood of the existing populations of Great Britain and Ireland, of Western and Southern France, of Spain, Portugal, Sicily, Sardinia, North Africa, and other Mediterranean districts. This is known as the Iberian race, and it can be traced clearly beyond history and the knowledge of metals, into the neolithic stone age, and may possibly be descended from some of the vastly older pal?olithic types such as that of Cro-Magnon. The type is everywhere a feeble one, of short stature, dolichocephalic skull, narrow oval face, orthognathic teeth, weak chin, and swarthy complexion. We have only to compare a skull of this type with one of ruder and stronger races, to understand how the latter must have survived as conquerors in the struggle for existence in the early ages of the world, before gunpowder and military discipline had placed civilization in a better position to contend with brute force and energy. Huxley sums up the latest evidence as to the distinctive types of these historic and prehistoric races of Europe as follows—
1. Blond long-heads of tall stature who appear with least admixture in Scandinavia, North Germany, and parts of the British Islands.
2. Brunette broad-heads of short stature in Central France, the Central European Highlands, and Piedmont. These are identified with the Ligurian race, and their most typical modern representatives are the Auvergnats and Savoyards.
3. Mongoloid brunette broad-heads of short stature 398 in Arctic and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, represented by the Lapps and other tribes of Northern Russia, passing into the Mongols and Chinese of Eastern Asia.
4. Brunette long-heads of short stature—the Iberian race.
Huxley adds, "The inhabitants of the regions which lie between these five present the intermediate gradations which might be expected to result from their intermixture. The evidence at present extant is consistent with the supposition that the blond long-heads, the brunette broad-heads, and the brunette long-heads—i.e. the Scandinavian, Ligurian, and Iberian races—have existed in Europe very nearly in their present localities throughout historic times and very far back into prehistoric times. There is no proof of any migration of Asiatics into Europe west of the basin of the Dnieper down to the time of Attila. On the contrary, the first great movements of the European population of which there is any conclusive evidence are that series of Gaulish invasions of the East and South, which ultimately extended from North Italy to Galatia in Asia Minor." I may add, that in more recent times many of the principal movements have been from west to east, viz. of Germans absorbing Slavs, and Slavs absorbing or expelling Fins and Tartars.
The next question is, how far can we trace back the existence of the present widely different fundamental types of mankind by the light of ascertained and certain facts?
The most important of these facts is, that Egyptian monuments enable us to say, that the existing diversities 399 of the typical races of mankind are not of recent origin, but have existed unchanged from the first dawn of history, say 7000 years ago. The Egyptians themselves have come down from the Old Empire, through all the vicissitudes of conquests, mixtures of races, changes of religion and language, so little altered that the fellah of to-day is often the image of the Egyptians who built the pyramids. The wooden statue of an officer of Chephren who died some 6000 years ago, was such a striking portrait of the village magistrate of to-day, that the Arab workmen christened it the "Sheik-el-beled." And these old Egyptians knew from the earliest times three at least of the fundamental types of mankind: the Nahsu, or negroes to the south, who are represented on the monuments so faithfully that they might be taken as typical pictures of the modern negro; the Lebu to the west, a fair-skinned and blue-eyed white race, whose descendants remain to this day as Kabyles and Berbers, in the same localities of North Africa; and to the east various tribes of Arabs, Syrians, and other Asiatics, who are always painted of a yellowish-brown colour, and whose features may often be traced in their modern descendants.
The same may be said of the wild and domestic animals of the various countries, which are the same now, unless where subsequently imported, as when they were first known to the ancient Egyptians.
We start, therefore, with this undoubted fact, that a period of 6000 or 7000 years has been insufficient to make any perceptible change in the types of pure races, whether of the animal or of human species. And doubtless this period might be greatly extended if we had historical records of the growth of Egyptian 400 civilization in the times prior to Menes, for in the earliest records we find accounts of wars both with the Nahsu and the Lebu, implying large populations of those races already existing both to the south and west of the valley of the Nile.
These positive dates carry us back so far that it is of little use to investigate minutely the differences of races shown by the remains of the neolithic period. They were very marked and numerous, but we have no evidence to show that they were different from those of more recent times, or that their date can be certainly said to be much older than the oldest Egyptian records. All we can infer with certainty is, that whether the neolithic period be of longer or shorter duration, no changes have taken place in the animal fauna contemporary with man which cannot be traced to human agency or other known causes. No new species have appeared, or old ones disappeared, in the course of natural evolution, as was the case during the quaternary and preceding geological periods.
The neolithic is, however, a mere drop in the ocean of time compared with the earlier periods in which the existence of pal?olithic man can be traced by his remains; and as far back as we can go we find ourselves confronted by the same fact of a diversity of races. As we have seen in the chapter on Quaternary man, Europe, where alone skulls and skeletons of the pal?olithic age have been discovered, affords at least three very distinct types—that of Canstadt, of Cro-Magnon, and of Furfooz.
The Canstadt type, which includes the men of Neanderthal and Spy, and which was widely diffused, having been found, as far south as Gibraltar, is apparently the oldest, and certainly the rudest and most 401 savage, being characterized by enormous brow-ridges, a low and receding forehead, projecting muzzle, and thick bones with powerful muscular attachments. It is very dolichocephalic, but the length is due mainly to the projection of the posterior part of the brain, the total size of which is below the average. The Cro-Magnon type, which is also very old, being contemporary with the cave-bear and mammoth, is the very opposite of that of Canstadt in many respects. The superciliary ridges are scarcely marked, the forehead is elevated, the contour of the skull good, and the volume of the brain equal or superior to that of many modern civilized races. The stature was tall, the nose straight or projecting, and the chin prominent. The only resemblance to the Canstadt type is, that they are both dolichocephalic chiefly on the posterior region, and both prognathous; but the differences are so many and profound that no anthropologist would say that one of these races could have been derived directly from the other. Still less could he say that the small round-headed race of Furfooz could have been a direct descendant of either of the two former. It is found in close vicinity with them over an extensive area, but generally in caves and deposits which, from their geological situation and associated fauna, point to a later origin. In fact, if we go by European evidence alone, we may consider it proved that the oldest known races were dolichocephalic, that the brachycephalic races came later, and that as long ago as in neolithic times, considerable intercrossing had taken place, which has gone on ever since, producing the great variety of intermediate types which now prevail over a great part of Europe.
This inference of the priority of the Canstadt type 402 is strengthened by its undoubted approximation to that of the most savage existing races and of the anthropoid apes. If we take the skulls and skeletons of Neanderthal and Spy, and compare them with those of modern civilized man, we find that while they are still perfectly human, they make a notable approximation towards a savage and Simian type in all the peculiarities which have been described by anthropologists as tests. The most important of all, that of the capacity and form of the brain, is best illustrated by the subjoined diagram of the skulls of the European, the Neanderthal, and the chimpanzee placed in superposition.
L\'HOMME AVANT L\'HISTOIRE. (From Debierre.)
It will be seen at a glance that the Neanderthal skull, especially in the frontal part, which is the chief seat of intelligence, is nearer to the chimpanzee than to modern man. And all the other characters correspond to this inferiority of brain. The enormous superciliary ridges; the greater length of the fore-arm; the prognathous jaws, larger canine teeth, and smaller chin; the thicker bones and stronger muscular attachments; the rounder ribs; the flatter tibia, and many 403 other characters described by pal?ontologists, all point in the same direction, and take us some considerable way towards the missing link which is to connect the human race with animal ancestors.
Still there are other considerations which must make us pause before asserting too positively that in following Quaternary man up to the Canstadt type, we are on the track of original man, and can say with confidence that by following it up still further we shall arrive at the earlier form from which man was differentiated. In the first place, Europe is the only part of the world where this Canstadt type has hitherto been found. We have abundant evidence from pal?olithic stone implements that man existed pretty well over the whole earth in early Quaternary times, but have hitherto no evidence from human remains outside of Europe from which we can draw any inference as to the type of man by whom these implements were made. It is clear that in Europe the oldest races were dolichocephalic, but we have no certainty that this was the case in Asia, in so many parts of which round-headed races exclusively prevail, and have done so from the earliest times. Again, we have no evidence as to the origin of another of the most strongly marked types, that of the Negro, or of the Negrito, Negrillo, Bushmen, Australian, or other existing races who approach most nearly to the Simian type. The only evidence we have of the type of races who were certainly early Quaternary, and may very possibly go back to an older geological age than that of the men of Neanderthal and Spy, comes from the New World, from California, Brazil, and Buenos Ayres, and points to a type not so savage and Simian as that of Canstadt, but rather to that which 404 characterizes all the different varieties of American man, though here also we find evidence of distinct dolichocephalic and brachycephalic races from the very earliest times. Another difficulty in the way of considering the Canstadt type as a real advance towards primitive man and the missing link, arises from the totally different and very superior type of Cro-Magnon being found so near it in time, as proved by the existence in both of the cave-bear, mammoth, and other extinct animals. We can hardly suppose the Cro-Magnon type to have sprung by slow evolution in the ordinary way of direct succession, from such a very different type as that of Canstadt during such a short interval of time as a small portion of one geological period. Again, it is very perplexing to find that the only Tertiary skulls and skeletons for which we possess really strong evidence, those of Castelnedolo, instead of showing, as might be expected, a still more rude and Simian aspect than that of Canstadt, show us the Canstadt type indeed, but in a milder and more human form.
All that can be said with certainty is, that as far as authentic evidence carries us back, the ancestral animal, or missing link, has not been discovered, but that man already existed from an enormous antiquity, extending certainly through the Quaternary into the Pliocene, and probably into the Miocene period, and that at the earliest date at which his remains have been found the race was already divided, as at present, into several sharply distinguished types.
This leaves the question of man\'s ultimate origin completely open to speculation, and enables both monogenists and polygenists to contend for their respective views with plausible arguments, and without fear 405 of being refuted by facts. Polygeny, or plural origins, would at first sight seem to be the most plausible theory to account for the great diversities of human races actually existing, and which can be shown to have existed from such an immense antiquity. And this seems to have been the first guess of primitive nations, for most of them considered themselves as autochthonous, sprung from the soil, or created by their own native gods. But by degrees this theory gave place to that of monogeny, which has been for a long while almost universally accepted by the civilized world. The cause of this among Christians, Jews, and Mahometans has been the acceptance of the narratives in Genesis, first of Adam and secondly of Noah, as literally true accounts of events which actually occurred. This is an argument which has completely broken down, and no competent and dispassionate thinker any longer accepts the Hebrew Scriptures as a literal and conclusive authority, on facts of history and science which lie within the domain of human reason. The question, therefore, became once more an open one, but as the old orthodox argument for monogeny faded into oblivion, a new and more powerful one was furnished by the doctrine of Evolution as expounded by Darwin. The same argument applies to man as to the rest of the animal world, that if separate species imply separate creations, these supernatural creations must be multiplied to such an extent as to make them altogether incredible; as for instance 150 separate creations for the land shells alone of one of the group of Madeira islands; while on the other hand genera grade off into species, species into races, and races into varieties, by such insensible degrees, as to establish an irresistible inference that they have all been 406 developed by evolution from common ancestors. No one, I suppose, seriously doubts that this is in the main the true theory of life, though there may still be some uncertainty as to the causes and mode of operation, and of the different steps and stages of this evolution. Monogeny therefore in this general sense of evolution from some primitive mammalian type, may be accepted as the present conclusion of science for man as it has come to be for the horse, dog, and so many other animals which are his constant companions. Their evolution can in many cases be traced up, through successive steps, to some more simple and generalized type in the Eocene; and it may be permitted to believe that if the whole geological record could be traced as far back as that of the horse, in the case of man and the other quadrumana, their pedigree would be as clearly made out. This, however, does not conclude the question, for it is quite permissible to contend that in the case of man, as in that of the horse, though the primary ancestral type in the Eocene may be one, the secondary types from which existing races are more immediately derived may be more than one, and may have been evolved in different localities. Thus in the case of the dog, it is almost certain that some of the existing races have been derived from wolves, and oth............