Part 6

This permanent fixation of traits, this profound impression of peculiar features, was probably no rapid process, but a very slow one. It took place between the close of the glacial epoch and the proto-historic period. This interim gives time enough; at the lowest calculation, it was twenty thousand years, while others have placed it at a hundred thousand. The division of the species into races unquestionably was completed long before the present geologic period, and under conditions widely diverse from those now existing.[46]

As within these wide limits of time we can reply to the question when the races became such, so within similar broad boundaries of space we can answer where their peculiar types were developed.

At the dawn of history, all the clearly marked sub-species of man bore distinct relations in number and distribution to the great continental areas into which the habitable land of the globe is divided. Nearly the whole of Europe and its geographical appendix, North Africa, were in the possession of the white race; the true negro type was limited to Central and Southern Africa and its appended islands; the yellow or Mongolian type was scarcely found outside of Asia; and the American sub-species was absolutely confined to that continent.

_The “Areas of Characterization.”_--In claiming that each sub-species had its origin and developed its physical peculiarities in the land areas here assigned to it, the ethnographer is supported by the unanimous verdict of modern zoölogical science. “Whatever be the cause,” writes the Rev. Samuel Haughton, “the distribution of fauna shows clearly that forces have been at work, developing in each great continent animal forms peculiar to itself, and differing from the animal forms developed by other continents.”[47]

In ethnography, those geographical areas whose physical conditions have left a durable impress on their human inhabitants have been called either “geographical provinces” (Bastian) or “areas of characterization” (de Quatrefages). I prefer and shall adopt the latter as more indicative of the meaning of the term. It signifies that like physio-geographical conditions prevailing over a given area inhabited for many generations by the same peoples have impressed upon them certain traits, physical and psychical, which have become hereditary and continue indeterminately, even under changed conditions of existence.

This general law is the recognized basis of modern scientific ethnography.[48] It is open to numerous limitations, and its application must never be made without the consideration of accessory and modifying circumstances. For instance, certain areas are much more potent than others in the influence they exert on man: some act more powerfully on his mind than on his body, or the reverse; some peoples are more susceptible to physical influences of a given class than others; and the length of time required is variable.

_Scheme of Geologic Time during the Age of Man in the Eastern Hemisphere._

{ Europe connected with Africa. { Man homogeneous. { Temperature mild. { Industry palæolithic with { 1. Pre-glacial. { African elephant in England. { simple implements. { { Tropical animals abundant. { Migrations extensive. { { { Language rudimentary. { Quaternary, { { Europe severed from { Man dividing into races. Diluvial { { Africa. { Industry palæolithic with or { 2. Glacial. { Temperature low. { compound implements. Pleistocene { { Reindeer in France. { Cave dwellings. Migrations Epoch. { { Arctic animals abundant. { limited; races in fixed areas. { { { Continents assume present forms. { Races completely established. { 3. Post-glacial. { Temperature rising. { Industry neolithic. { Temperate zones established. { Beginning of sedentary life. { Languages developed in classes.

{ Geographic conditions undisturbed. { Races develop into contact. { 1. Pre-historic. { Wild animals not diminished. { Industry of stone and copper. { Present { 2. Proto- { Conditions altered by agriculture. { Great migrations begin. or { historic. { Wild animals slain or tamed. { Industry of bronze and iron. Alluvial { Epoch. { { Geographic conditions greatly { Extensive mingling of races. { 3. Historic. { modified by man. { Development of nations. { { All lower animals subjugated.

According to the analogy of other organic beings, man would have been more impressible to his surroundings in the early history of his existence as a species, the young, either as an individual or a genus, being more plastic than the old. Furthermore, in his then condition of culture, or absence of culture, he had less to oppose to the assaults of his environment.

_Classification of Races._--It is not possible in the present status of the science of man to point out precisely how the various conditions of the great continental areas reacted on the homogeneous primitive type to develop the races as we know them. The same difficulty encounters us with other animals and with plants. We know, however, that at the dawn of history each of these areas was peopled by nations resembling each other much more than they resembled nations of any of the other areas.

In addition to the great continents there were many lesser regions, peninsulas and islands, usually on the borders of the main areas of characterization, where intermingling of types was sure to arise, and other types be formed, who in turn received some particular impress from their environment.

These considerations prompt me to offer the following as the most appropriate scheme in the present condition of science for the subdivision of the species Man into its several races or varieties.

I. THE EURAFRICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color white, hair wavy, nose narrow, jaws straight, skull variable, languages inflectional, religions ideal.

II. THE AUSTAFRICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color black, hair woolly, nose flat, jaws protruding, skull long, languages agglutinative, religions material.

III. THE ASIAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color yellowish or brownish, hair straight, nose flat or medium, jaws straight, skull broad and high, languages isolating or agglutinative, religions material.

IV. THE AMERICAN RACE.--_Traits._--Color coppery, hair straight, nose narrow, jaws straight, skull variable, languages incorporating, religions ideal.

V. INSULAR OR LITORAL PEOPLES.--_Traits._--Color dark, hair lank or wavy, languages agglutinative.

In this scheme the more prominent and permanent traits are named first. While individuals of pure blood can easily be found in all the races who do not correspond in all particulars to these descriptions, I do not hesitate to assert that ninety-five per cent. of the whole of the pure blood of any of the races here classified will correspond to the standards given.

_Subdivisions of Races._--The further subdivisions of ethnography follow to some extent the important doctrine of the “areas of characterization,” that is, they are geographical; but as the classification of men advances in minuteness, other considerations become paramount, notably, language and government. These elements allow us to subdivide a _race_ into its _branches_; a branch into its _stocks_; a stock into its _groups_, and these again into _tribes_, _peoples_, or _nations_.

Classified in this manner, the human species presents the subdivisions shown on the adjacent scheme:

_General Ethnographic Scheme._

+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- _Race._ | _Traits._ |_Branches._| _Stocks._ |_Groups or Peoples._ -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- | | | {|1. Libyan. | | I. |1. Hamitic. {|2. Egyptian. |Color white. |South | {|3. East African. | | Medit- | {|1. Arabian. Eurafrican.|Hair wavy. | erranean. |2. Semitic. {|2. Abyssynian. | | | {|3. Chaldean. | | II. |1. Euskaric. |1. Euskarian. |Nose Narrow. |North |2. Aryac. |Indo-Germanic or | | Medit- | | Celtindic peoples. | | erranean. |3. Caucasic. |Peoples of the | | | | Caucasus. -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- | | |1. Central |Dwarfs of the Congo. | | I. | African. | |Color black | Negrillo. |2. South |Bushmen, Hottentots. | or dark. | | African. | | | |1. Nilotic. |Nubian. | | II. |2. Soudanese. | Austafri- |Hair frizzly.| Negro. |3. Senegambian.| can. | | |4. Guinean. | |Nose broad. | III. | |Caffres and Congo | | Negroid. |1. Bantu. | tribes. -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- | | I. {|1. Chinese. |Chinese. |Color yellow | Sinitic. {|2. Thibetan. |Natives of Thibet. | or olive. | {|3. Indo- |Burmese, Siamese. | | | Chinese. | | | {|1. Tungusic. |Manchus, Tungus. Asian. |Hair | {|2. Mongolic. |Mongols, Kalmucks. | straight. | II. {|3. Tataric. |Turks, Cossacks. |Nose medium. | Sibiric. {|4. Finnic. |Finns, Magyars. | | {|5. Arctic. |Chukchis, Ainos. | | {| 6. Japanic. |Japanese, Koreans. -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- | | {|1. Arctic. |Eskimos. |Color | I. {|2. Atlantic. |Tinneh, Algonkins, |coppery. |Northern. {| | Iroquois. American. |Hair straight| {|3. Pacific. |Chinooks, Kolosh, etc. | or wavy. | II. {|1. Mexican. |Nahuas, Tarascos. | |Central. {|2. Isthmian. |Mayas, Chapanecs. |Nose medium. | III. {|1. Atlantic. |Caribs, Arawaks, | |Southern. {| | Tupis. | | {|2. Pacific. |Chibehas, Qquichuas. -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+---------------------- |Color dark. | I. {|1. Negrito. |Mincopies, Aetas. Insular | |Negritic. {|2. Papuan. |New Guineans. and |Hair wavy or | {|3. Melanesian. |Feejeeans, etc. Litoral | frizzly. | II. {|1. Malayan. |Malays, Tagalas. Peoples. | |Malayic. {|2. Polynesian. |Pacific Islanders. |Nose medium | III. {|1. Australian. |Australians. | or narrow. |Australie.{|2. Dravidian. |Dravidas, Mundas. -----------+-------------+-----------+---------------+----------------------

That these distinctions may be plain I append definitions of the ethnographic terms employed.

_Race._--A variety or sub-species of the species _Man_, presenting a number of distinct and permanent (hereditary) traits of the character above described.

_Branch._--A portion of a race separated geographically, linguistically, or otherwise, from other portions of the race.

_Stock._--A portion of a branch united by some prominent trait, especially language, offering presumptive evidence of demonstrable relationship. The individual elements of a _stock_ are its _peoples_.

A _group_ consists of a number of these peoples who are connected together by a closer tie, geographical, linguistic, or physical, than that which unites the members of the stock.

A _tribe_ is a body of men collected under one government. They are presumably of the same race and dialect.

A _nation_, on the other hand, is a body of men under one government, frequently of different languages and races. Its members have no presumed relationship further than that they belong to the same species.

There are some other terms the precise meaning of which should be defined before we proceed, the more so as there is not that uniformity in their use among ethnographers which were desirable.

This very word _ethnos_, with its adjective _ethnic_, is an example. What is an _ethnos_? I know no better word for it in English than a people, as I have already explained this word,--one of the elements of a stock all whose members, there is reason to believe, have a demonstrable relationship. Thus we should speak of the Aryan _stock_, made up of the Latin, Greek, Celtic and other _peoples_. The relationship among the members of a _people_ is closer than that between the members of a _stock_. _People_ corresponds to the Old English _folk_ (German _Volk_), but _folk_ in the modern English scientific terms “folk-lore,” “folk-medicine,” has acquired a different signification.

_Culture_ and _civilization_ are other terms not always correctly employed. The former is the broader, the generic word. All forms of human society show more or less culture; but civilization is a certain stage of culture, and a rather high one, when men unite under settled governments to form a state or commonwealth (_civitas_) with acknowledged individual rights (_civis_). This presupposes a knowledge of various arts and developed mental powers.

Much attention was paid by older writers to dividing the progress of culture into a number of stages or stadia. One of these, an American author, Lewis H. Morgan, suggested an elaborate scheme according to which the periods of man’s development should correspond with historical conditions of culture, and these he divided into lower, middle and upper states of savagery, barbarism, and civilization, each characterized by the introduction of some new art.

The problem is far too complicated to admit of any such mechanical solution. The possession of a given art, as the bow and arrow, or smelting iron, does not lift a people, nor is it an indication of their culture. Peoples low in one point are high in others; they develop along different lines, with scarcely a common measure, and their place in a general scheme must be determined by an exhaustive investigation of all their powers and conquests, and perhaps a comparison with some other standards than those which we have been brought up to consider the best.

LECTURE IV.

THE EURAFRICAN RACE; SOUTH MEDITERRANEAN BRANCH.

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; Euscaric 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 idealism. 2. The Abyssinian Group. Tribes included. Period of migration. Condition. 3. The Chaldean Group. Tribes included. The modern Jew.

The leading race in all history has been the White Race. It is proper therefore that it should have our chief attention in the study of the distribution of the species. By some writers it is called the Caucasian, by others the Japetic, and by others again the European race--all inaccurate terms, for the race never originated in the Caucasus, never descended from the mythical Japetus or Japheth, and when first it appeared on the horizon of history, its most extensive possessions and the seats of its highest culture were not in Europe, nor yet in Asia, but in Africa.

_Scheme of the European Race: South Mediterranean Branch._

(Extinct peoples in _italics_.)

{ { _Numidians_, _Getulians_, { { _Libyans_, _Maurianians_, { { _Guanches_, Berbers, Rifians, { 1. Libyan Group. { Zouaves, Kabyles, Tuareks, Tibbus, { { Ghadumes, Mzabites, _Ghanatas_, I. { { _Etruscans_, _Amorites_, Hamitic { { _Assyrians_, _Hittites_. (?) Stock. { { 2. Egyptian Group. { Copts, Fellaheen. { { { Gallas, Somalis, Danakils, { 3. East African Group. { Bedjas, Bilins, { { Afars, Khamirs.

{ { _Himyarites_, _Sabeans_, { 1. Arabian Group. { _Nabotheans_, Arabs, { { Bedawin, Ehkilis. II. { Semitic { { Amharnis, Tigris, Stock. { 2. Abyssinian Group. { Tigrinas, Gheez, { { Ethiopians, Harraras. { { 3. Chaldean Group. { Israelites, Arameans, Samaritans.

This statement may astonish you, and I know no writer who has properly emphasized the fact that the white race is geographically and historically an _African_ race. I have calculated with some care the area of its control of the three continents when their inhabitants first became known. The results are these: The white race then possessed:[49]

In Asia 2,500,000 square miles. In Europe 3,000,000 “ “ In Africa 3,500,000 “ “

These figures vindicate for the race the title I have given it--Eurafrican.

More than this: the purest and finest physical specimens of the white race always have been and _still are_ found native to African soil; and the leading nations of the race, those who have most contributed to its glory, and to the advance of the civilization of the world, either have resided in Africa or can be traced to it as their ancestral home.

_Types of the White Race._--Let us first define the characteristics, physical and mental, of the white race.

In one of its pronounced types, the individuals are blondes, tall in stature, the eyes blue or grey, the hair yellow or reddish and wavy, the beard full, the nose narrow and prominent (leptorhin), the chin well defined, the jaws straight (orthognathic), the skull long (dolichocephalic) or medium, the eyes narrow (microsemes), the supra-orbital ridges rather prominent, the face moderately oval.

This is the typical appearance of the ancient Goths, Teutons and Scandinavians, and of the modern Swedes and Germans. It was also that of the ancient Libyans, and is still preserved in the greatest purity among their descendants in Morocco and Algiers; hence I shall call it the Libyo-Teutonic type.

A second type is also tall in stature, but red-haired, freckled complexion, the face and forehead broad, the cheek bones prominent, the eyes nearly circular (megasemes), the jaws and mouth projecting (prognathic), the skulls broad and high (brachycephalic-hypsistenocephalic), the chin square and firm.

This is the type we see preserved in some of the Highland Scotch clans, and in the “Tuatha de Danann” of Ireland, recalling the large-limbed and red-haired “Caledonians” of Tacitus, and those ancient Britons who, under Queen Boadicea, withstood so valiantly the Roman legions. The Gauls or Cimbri of Belgium and northern France were of this type, and hence it has been called the “Cymric” type.

But there is a second Celtic type, also of vast antiquity, claimed by some to be the only pure form. In it the skull is also broad--broader than the former variety; but the stature is undersized, the hair and eyes dark-brown, the complexion brunette, the orbits rounded, the forehead full. Modern representatives of this type are the dark clans of the Highlanders, the Irish west of the river Shannon, the Manx, the Welsh, the Bretons of France, the Auvergnats, the Walloons of Belgium and the Ladins of eastern Switzerland.

The most ancient known seats of these dark Celts were in extreme western Europe and the isles adjacent. This location points them out as one of the oldest peoples in Europe, whether their presence is explained by immigration or autochthonous descent. Part of their possessions in early historic times was in the Iberian peninsula, along the Cantabrian mountains in northern Spain. Here they were in immediate contact with members of the white race of a different type, the Euscarians or Basques.

In them the stature is medium, the form symmetrical, hair and eyes are dark but rarely black, the complexion dark and sallow, the face oval, and the skull long, the length being in the posterior (occipital) region. Although the last mentioned is an important distinction between the Celtic and the Euskaric skull, there is unquestionably a closer resemblance physically between the Celts and Basques, who speak totally diverse tongues, than between the Celts and Cymri, whose tongue was the same.

In these four typical groups from the extreme west of Europe we find sharp contrasts within limited areas, among peoples some of whom are unquestionably consanguine. Two of the groups, the Teutonic and Cymric, belong in color and hair and stature to the blonde type, but differ profoundly in shape of skull and facial bones; the two others belong to the brunette type, but differ equally in osseous character. In general physical traits the Celtic differs less from the Euskaric than from the Cymric type, as was recognized by the historian Tacitus.

These facts bring out an ethnic principle of importance--the variability of traits within the racial limits--and this becomes more marked as the race is higher in the scale of organic development. No race remains closer to its type than the Austafrican, none departs from it so constantly as the Eurafrican. Wherever we find the unmixed white race we find its blonde and brunette varieties, its prognathic and orthognathic jaws, its long-skulled and broad-skulled heads.[50] To establish genealogic schemes exclusively upon these differences, as has been the work of so many living anthropologists, is to build houses of cards.