PRINCIPLES or ANTHROPOLOGY - | AND Le OLO GY = Far i LOWDERMILK & CO. 1424-6 F Street, W ash tN} tol ; Standard. Choice BOOKS. BOOKS BO| GHT ead . sates proc om “sae » os © PRINCIPLES — ~ ANTHROPOLOGY 2 Be) bu BUREAU’ OF ETHNOLOGY, | ~— 3968 1894 LIBRARY. REV. THOMAS HUGHES, S.J. BY She o ND. 2p Ll ON, New York, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO: BENZIGER BROTHERS, Printers to the Holy Apostolic See. 1890. ~ COPYRIGHTED, 1889, <8 - By J. P. FRIEDEN., PREFACE, THIs reproduction of four lectures, delivered be- fore the members of the Detroit College Alumni Association, and published by the same gentlemen during the winter of 1888-89, is respectfully dedi- cated to the cultured classes of the community, and to the advanced students in colleges and acad- emies, who frequently ask what line of theoretic truth is to be followed, in the midst of so much scientific research. If we would ‘not lose the best part of the practical results which science offers us, we must keep scrupulously to the line of truth which sound logic requires us to follow. THE AUTHOR. New York, July 31st, 1890. 3 CONTENTS. ANTHROPOLOGY. CHAPTER I. PREHISTORIC RACES. (N. B. The numbers refer to the paragraphs.) The prehistoric difficulty, 3; barbarism, 6; geography of the prehistoric, 10 ; methods of induction, 13 ; geologi- cal chronology, 15 ; argument of induction, 16. Archeology, 18 ; ages of metal, 19; neolithic age of pol- ished stone, 25; evidence, 28; palzolithic age of chipped stone, 29; glacial epoch, 30; epochs, periods, formations, 31 ; results of archeology, 32. Paleontology, 33 ; extinction of species, 34 ; subdivisions ’ of the ages, 35. | Anthropology, 36; tertiary man, 38 ; man and geology, 46 ; man and the universe, 47. CHAPTER) If, ACTUAL RACES IN HIsToRY. The term, species, 51; the test of species, 52; the term, race, 55; analogies of the lower orders, 56; variations, 58 ; argument of analogy, 59. 6 Contents. Results of direct observation, 61 ; physical and physiologi- cal conclusions, 63. Intellectual qualities : speech, 65 ; talk- ing apes and submerged continents, 66; tongues, 68; con- science, 69 ; charity, 71 ; religion, 73. Differentiation of races, 76; conditions of life, or environ- ment, 77; radical nature and racial nature, 80 ; vitiated con- ditions of life, 81. Hunters, shepherds, farmers, 82; cost of acclimatization, 83; migrations, 85; instincts of sociability, 88; the man of the future, 93. Recapitulation: results of anthropology, 95. BIOLOGY. CHAPTER Ait. SPECIES ; OR, DARWINISM. Naturalism or materialism, 100; species, race, Io4 ; the origin of Darwinism, 105. Sophisms: analogy, equivoca- tion,comparison, erudition, hypothesis, begging the question, 106, | Likeness, filiation, heredity, tog. Three objections to. natural selection: Dr. Romanes, 112 ; (a) sterility of species, 113; (6) time and other accidents, 114 ; (¢) utilities, —a vicious circle, 115 ; Mr. Darwin’s manner of answering, 117; more sophisms : chance, induction, post hoc, non-causa, 121. Deduction : (a) uninterrupted descent, 122; (4) unities and varieties in nature: law of permanent characterization, 123; (c) a plea for genuine biology, 126; the miraculous in science, the sophism ad odium, 128. Rudiments, 129 ; evolution and degeneration, 132; hybrids and mongrels, 133 ; reversion, disordered variation, atavism, 134; law of correlation, 135; use and non-use,136; the struggle for existence, 139 ; the economy of nature, 142; survival of the fittest, 143 ; natural selection, 145. 3 - > ¥ q ; ' Contents. 7 CHAPTER <4LV. CELLS ; OR, EVOLUTION. The microscope and animalcules, 148 ; the cell, 150; pro- toplasm, 151; no neutral ground between life and non-life : negative argument, 155 ; positive argument, (2) by culture ; the microbe, 157; (4) by observation in nature, 160; multi- cellular organisms, 161; One vivum ex vivo, ex cellula,163; embryonic development, 164. History of the cell in the universe: first and second days of Moses, 166; third day, 167; fourth day, 169; fifth day, 170. Sixth day, first part, 172 ; progress of species not a descent of species, 173; no transitional types, 176 ; the ascidian and amphioxus, 178 ; the tertiary age, 182; nature as it is, 184; nature as it was, 188; the facts of progress, 189; (a) from the simple to the complex; Haeckel’s phylogenesis, 190 ; (4) conditions of the progress, 192; (c) its arithmetic, 193; (d) no single chain of beings, 196. Sixth day, second part: psychology, 197; conclusion: points not touched in these four chapters, 200. ANTHROPOLOGY. CHAPTER I. PREHISTORIC RACES. 1. In the congress of German naturalists and physicians held at Wiesbaden, the celebrated Berlin professor, Virchow, delivered an address on the progress of anthropology and biology. Reviewing, under the double aspect of prehistoric and historic man, the present state of anthropology, he ex- pounded several views at considerable length. An- thropology is the science which treats of the human species 1n its natural groups and general formation. It involves the study of all human characteristics, as well physical, physiological and pathological, as moral, social, and political. ‘The professor stated that, as to prehistoric anthropology, every positive advance which we had made in that study had re- “moved us farther than before from any proof of evolution to be found there. Man has not arisen from the ape, nor has any ape-man existed linking the two species together. Then, as to historic races, he proved that the Australian, which is quoted as being the most imperfect among them, is shown to 9 10 Prehistoric Races. be nowise ape-like, but entirely human, like our- selves. Finally, touching the biological question of the transformation of species, he affirmed that it is not yet possible to give any certain proofs of man’s tertiary origin in the world. 2. Such a statement of the question, coming from such a quarter, seems to be a propitious augury that the great fight of evolution, after last- ing for more than thirty years, is, like other wars of long duration, approaching a final issue. Many - signs of the same coming event have been discerned elsewhere. And, taking this state of things as our point of departure, we may review the anthropo- logical question, as it has stood thus far, and as it seems to be nearing its solution to-day. Subse- quently we shall take up the question in biology. The manner of treatment which recommends itself is not that of the specialist, but that of the philo- sophical critic, who gauges the value of scientific proofs by the general laws of reason and philosophy. Leaving, then, the German and other specialists aside, it is with this school of criticism that we venture to range ourselves. eee es 3. To apprehend the prehistoric difficulty which attaches itself to anthropology, I would invite you The Prehis. t0 take a stand upon some commanding toric Diffi- | spot, whence the whole field of the con- oe tention may be surveyed. We can thus conceive, too, some preliminary notions on the pre- The Prehistoric Difficulty. I historic and savage states of humanity. Perhaps no better position offers itself than this present moment of time which is now passing, and this point of space in which we now happen to be. We are here, and now: we are defined by this moment and this point. How different has it been with the family to which we belong! Men and women have lived, and their hearts have throbbed, all over the habitable space on this globe of ours, and all the way back through the ages past, in places where we have never set a foot, in ages long before we were born. The course of our family’s history, origin- ating in a definite place and at a definite time, has flowed outward and onward to all the borders and limits of this habitable globe. Unlike the fated sameness of any dumb species of animals, with its instincts running in a fixed channel, and the ex- pression of its life about as rigid as a scientific for- mula, the story of our family has been rather that of a turbulent sea, swelling and surging in all direc- tions. It has ever had afree and self-willed nature. It has ever been a restless body of vitality, just kept within some bounds of time and space and eternal laws, by one Power which knows how to limit the tide. 4. Defining in particular the position of our an- cestry, with reference to the knowledge that posterity were to acquire of them, we may note that different fortunes have attended different lines in the family’s an- Outside of History. 12 Prehistoric Races. tecedents. Some parts of its eventful course have been happy enough to find historians, and have been described in the faithful reports of men living, observ- ing and writing at the time that events happened, or within a reasonable and speaking distance of men who lived at the time. Such reports give us what is called documentary or monumental history. But there are parts also which are prior to certain lines of documentary history, or which lie, some way or — other, outside of the margins of any local records. They are like the portions which the Chinese com- prise in their annals, but which they expressly desig- nate “parts outside of history.” Such unrecorded antecedents of our history the phere ag has been pleased to call “the prehistoric.” 5. Thus in France, Denmark and England, in America, North and South, we may discern with the aid of archzology the tidal remains of an ancient humanity, which must have welled up from its primal springs somewhere, probably in the East, but thence over- flowed and rolled on to what were as yet but vacant shores. Whether such relics are to be found in | China and Japan, we are not yet informed. As that overflowing population rolled so far away from its origin and its source, it lost in many instances the best part of its civilization, just as we should lose it now, with all our culture, nay, because of our delicate culture, if we were stranded on barren islands. It lost its social depth, and carried with Outside of Civilization. Barbarism. 13 it but the fractured relics of facts, traditions and histories, of arts and crafts, and even of the very means and methods of subsistence. If, then, in the lands of its colonization, the dire evil of famine, and the intense cold of an age of ice overtook it, what else should we expect but to find it in holes and dens, with the bear and the deer in its very midst, destitute and soon degraded, in numbers few, like the Esquimaux or Alaskans, and with families ex- tremely small? This last circumstance, of a limited offspring, seems to follow in such surroundings, either because of other reasons that we might think of, or, as the latest official report from Alaska men- tions, simply because of the hardships of their con- dition. And what hardships those are, when the wife so inevitably becomes a mere drudge, a slave, even to her youngest sons! On these terms a few generations would plunge the most civilized of us into barbarism. 6. Barbarism is a state of things which results from the composition of two factors, human beings to become destitute, and desperate con- ditions of life to make them so. ‘Sic is plenty of room to imagine well-nigh desperate conditions of existence, and therefore impossible conditions of civilization. The caves and holes of an icy cold age, with wild beasts prowling about, and, instead of lending us their skins to keep us warm, choosing rather to make their meals on us, and on our children—these and other such inter- 14 Prehistoric Races. esting situations, which prehistoric archeology, as we shall see, quite significantly suggests, would reduce the best of us to the abject condition of “cave men,” taken at their worst. And, possibly, if there was nothing better to be had, we might reconcile ourselves to things as they were; espe- cially when, all distinct recollection of a better state dying away in the course of time, custom with its strong, nervous bonds of a second nature could give men a positive preference for a cave or a hole, as we know it gives some a preference for a craggy hill-top or a smoky tent. Thus, in fact, we see that troglodytes, or men who live in caves, are recorded all through history. 7. Not a little rhetoric has been expended on the savagery of these cave-men, and the origin which must have been theirs down among the tribes of apes. So it 1s worth our while to observe that, on the contrary, the more civilized the men had been before, that is to say, the more resources they had enjoyed outside of themselves for procuring food, clothing, and shelter, the fewer resources then would they find in themselves, and the more abject would their condition be, in the circumstances which we are contemplating. We may bring this matter home to ourselves ; for it is quite possible that the present civilization will collapse into depths undreamed of now. Other great civilizations have vanished like a dream of the night before us. And what we say is this, that in a Cave-men. Barbarism. 15 similar contingency, starvation would follow for ourselves and our posterity. Add, then, to the physical conditions which are always within easy distance of realization, as geologists, astronomers, and physiologists of the sea can tell us—add the moral conditions so soon to follow, of rapine, cruelty, and the other vices attendant on a collaps- ing state of society. Why, with all the terrors of menacing war and civilized control around, how hard is it to keep in check the brutal element of human nature, either in a country at large or ina single great city! One is reminded of the story how Adonibezec fled from the battle-field, and they pursued him and took him, and cut off his fingers and toes. And what did the wretched man say? “Seventy kings,” he said, “ having their fingers and toes cut off, have gathered up the leavings of meat under my table!” What must it be when civil authority is no more, martial law has no terrors to display, traditions are dying out, religion breaking up into idolatry, every man’s hand against his neighbor, and all ready to pounce upon the weak- est! Such individualism issues in barbarism, yes, African degradation, cave-men, troglodytes, almost ape-men. But then the ape-men will have come down from above; they will not have mounted up from below! 8. And when out of chaos order does arise again, owing to the infusion of a new blood, or to some genius actuating the potential vigor of human 16 Prehistoric Races. nature, human still in the midst of its degrada- tion, yet states and periods, republics and empires Periods never Have no such resurrection before them. recur. They have only a single course to run, a single goal to reach and turn, and, fleeting like a courier, they are seen no more. They live, grow, and dissolve; there is no resurrection for them. So that, if the records are not saved before the courier disappears, he will never return to bring them. All will have faded into the prehistoric. 9. The obscurity enveloping such a movement of transition, when barbarism is one of the termini, has given some wide scope to certain platitudes about these cave-men. ‘The air of an ascertained geography and chronology is thrown about these ancestors of ours, who are to be conceived, it is said, as crouching in caves and crunching the bones of wild beasts. A specimen of such platitudes offended our eyes the other day, when, answering the ex-Premier of Eng- land, a noted writer discoursed some rhetoric thus, in his most conclusive style: “It is hardly possible to conceive of the years that lie between the caves in which crouched our native ancestors crunching the bones of wild beasts, and the home of the civil- ized man. Think of the billowed years that must have rolled between these shores!” Here is an air of scientific geography and an immeasurable chron- ology thrown about poor people, who certainly were badly off. But it scarcely requires science to see Prehistoric Platitudes. Geography of the Prehistortc. 17 that a short time can suffice to drag people down; and not quite an interminable time is needed to lift them up again. The great and active energies in human nature are only waiting for the right touch and pressure to yield up their resources for use and development. How it has been with them in the past, we shall see, when we have determined the facts of the case. This is enough, then, of the preliminary notions, which will serve to fix the scientific imagination on the study before us. Now let us address ourselves to the facts of the case, and see what interpretation they call for, and will bear. | to. We may first sketch the outlines of the geog- raphy which the prehistoric has really covered. Then the chronology will come in order, when we consider the ages, as they are called, of iron, bronze and stone. Pray observe Gesraphy of ; the Prehis- that the geography here will reproduce, toric. in its distribution of human fortunes, some of the same social phenomena which we wit- ness on a smaller scale in the mixed population of any great city. There you may find opposite ex- tremes at the same time of penury and opulence, within a stone’s throw of one another, separated by just a street or two on the right hand or the left. And here, in the geography before us, you will find the prehistoric separated from the historic only by a natural boundary, as the Alps or the Danube; such barriers as have always been enough to sepa- 18 Prehistoric Races. rate one race from another, and keep both unmixed. Or else the prehistoric dissolves into the historic, on the same ground; as in America, which is certainly now the subject of luminous history, we have only to go back four hundred years and we reach the line and cross it, and we are away in dim prehistoric America. So too is it with the greater part of Africa. In Iceland, Britain, Gaul, and Germany, in the lands of the North-East, overflowing with that population of Hun and Goth which poured into Kurope, we have to travel back not two thousand years and we are stranded on the shores of the pre- historic. All the while, during four and six thou- sand years, other lands are abounding in monuments, written records, trustworthy traditions. But, over the ground of the prehistoric, records are wanting ; the induction of science alone is available; and we interpret as best we can the relics of archeology, of paleontology, of anthropology, which have escaped the ravages of time; and we note the few geological touches which the same ravages of time have left behind them. These geological data are few, for the records of the rocks were far on toward com- pleting the last chapter of their history, when man with his hopes and his fears entered on this arena of his short and anxious career. 7 11. Some lands seem never to have had a pre- Lands never historic humanity to grace them sor ae Prehistoric. blight them. All humanity there, how- ever ancient, is in the full light of history. Geography of the Prehistoric. 19 Beyond it there gleams a dawn of mythology and fable—but not the fable of an ape-man coming up from the tribes of brutes; quite the opposite, gods coming down to be heroes and men. Nor is there any reason to believe that these are the youngest of the nations; rather they are the oldest. And some do not recede even into the twilight of mythology; they are historic back to the very first, scientifically and critically historic, if documentary and monumental records have any value upon earth. Cradle-lands such as these never had any- thing to do with prehistoric races, except as bor- dering on them, or as originating them, in the sense which we shall explain farther on; inasmuch as these are the lands which sent forth such races on their melancholy wanderings, till the day should come when, dead or alive, their relics would be re- vealed in the far-off history of the future, and be- come the subject of a science, anthropology, yet to be. Alive, such relics appear in Australia and in the land of the Bushman; dead, in the extinct races of Canstadt, Cro-Magnon and others. 12. The nations that stayed at home were those of Egypt, Babylonia, Arabia, Persia, Phoenicia, India. They were stationary In MOTE Notions that senses than one. Theystayed at home, never retro- and they were conservative besides. ®™#¢°* In consequence, they never lost so much that they reached a state of savagery, or that they ever had a journey to take back toward civilization. It may 20 Prehistoric Races. be said of them that, if they are not progressive peoples, one reason is this: they never retrograded so far as to become nations of progress under the spur of reaction. Had they fallen lower, they might now stand higher. But their immobility forbade progress. ‘The conservatism of these sons of Sem is not that recuperative power which the sons of Japhet have, and which the sons of Ham. conspicuously have not. Vet they must have lost something under the friction of ages. Their con- servatism could not guarantee them against the wear and tear of time. Hence that very immobil- ity of theirs,so proverbial in history, serves this ex- cellent purpose of showing that since they never gained anything, for it was not in them, and yet they must have lost not a little, for that is the condition of all things human, they are a standing monument of people who could not have come up from a state of savagery to be what they are to-day. ‘They, and the rest of us too, have come down from a state of. higher civilization. It is so easy a matter to run down, as every organism and every mechanism shows us! The whole history of our family comes to this: it has done best when it kept what it had, and next to best when it got back what it had lost. We have yet to find the nation which, without the help of revealed religion, shows signs of having still as much as the family, by all accounts, possessed at its origin. Some have never declined much, some have declined to rise again, others never to rise The Inductions of Science. 21 again; and all alike show that we have never risen higher than our origin, and those amongst us have done best who have kept nearest to the level of that. 13. Let this suffice to sketch the geographical outlines of our subject. We may now state the methods which science adopts to form its inductive conclusions. It endeavors to find all the traces possible of human life prior to historic times. It deciphers and interprets such traces, as indicative of the physical, intellect- ual or social condition of the men who existed then. ‘These traces and indications of antecedent human life are to be found in the nature of certain objects imbedded in the soil, or otherwise pre- - served; they are also deciphered in the location, situation, where such objects are met with undis- turbed. 14. The objects in question are, first, the fossil relics of men themselves. These appertain to an- thropology proper. Secondly, they are the fossil relics of animals that lived with men; and these pertain to palzontology. In the third place, there © are weapons and utensils which men made and used —articles of industry. ‘The degree of perfection or imperfection discernible in their make reflects upon the degree of civilization which produced them. For the material out of which they are made may have been easier or harder to procure, as stone is easier to get, or a bone, than bronze or iron. Or the Methods of Induction. 22 Prehistoric Races. work expended on the material may be better or worse, as chipping the stone is an inferior process to smoothing and polishing it. All this is the sub- ject-matter of archeology. Finally, as to the loca- tions, these objects, of whatever kind or workman- ship, have been preserved for us, as a general rule, by the successive deposits of soil covering them in the course of time, and thereby “ fossilizing”” them; that is to say, putting them in the condition that we have to dig them up, or unearth them now. Deposits of soil, or stratification by natural agents, are referred to geology, which thus is called upon to interpret the antiquity of those strata, and there- fore to settle the antiquity and chronology of pre- historic man, whose relics are found in the strata. 15. We may estimate at once the value of this geological chronology, this determination of time by the computations of geology. Whether this science is engaged in con- templating the last sediment deposited right under our eyes in the Mississippi, or in com- puting the time required for the entire formation of the terrestrial globe, it cannot be credited with the qualifications of an exact time-keeper; nor in its practical efforts, when tested by actual observation, has it come out felicitously in its results. The rea- son seems to be that it has a time of its own, in- deed; but geological time is not our historic time; and there is no ascertained formula to make the reduction of one in terms of the other. The meas- Geological Chronology. Geological Chronology. 23 ure which natural forces employ in laying down a stratum of clay on the bed of a river is certainly not the same as the measure which divides the story of mankind into days and years and centuries, by solar and terrestrial revolutions. Nor is it the same as that which marks off generation from gen- eration among mankind, dividing them by the births and deaths of men. Geology, in the order -and in the thickness of its deposits, agrees with neither of these processes, neither that of astronomy nor that of anthropology. If the astronomicai revolutions have been regular, if the revolving cy- cles of human generations have been quite irregular, the evolution of the earth’s present surface has had a measure of its own, a time of its own, not identi- cal with either of theirs. Yet, to derive any light from geology on the subject of man’s antiquity, its time must be made commensurate with man’s time. And accordingly the inductive effort has been made to argue from what we see, in present circumstances, going on in certain places that we know, to what we have not seen, in circumstances and places en- tirely different and unknown. But this inductive effort is faulty, because there is no induction about it. | 16. Induction, as a form of argument, requires a sutficient enumeration of phenomena to formulate a general law, which is found to stand the test of verification on be- ing applied to cases known, and which, therefore, Argument of Induction. 24 Prehistoric Races. may bevrelied on to interpret things rightly when applied to the unknown. Here thereis no suff- cient enumeration of facts to formulate any law. Solitary facts known are compared with solitary unknowns; and conclusions are jumped at from such premises as logic will not admit, to begin with. And the end of the argument corresponds to the beginning. For when the hastily constructed law, derived from- a few known facts, is tested in ~ actual cases under our eyes, it is found so often faulty in its sum total of years required to fossilize a tree on the bank of the Mississippi, or to lay down ten or twenty feet of loam, that, whenever geology pretends to measure its time in terms of history, we are perfectly justified in suspending our judg- ment, until it has found a common denominator for historical duration and its own duration—two very different things. 17, It does mark the order of successvam whether in the soils deposited, or in the objects uae which those deposits contain. It marks Inductive. | too the relative proportion of duration, which respective thicknesses of the stra- tification seem to have required. But, with all that, the conditions of earth, and water, and air, and sky have been so different at the different periods of ter- restrial evolution that, to read the lesson of strati- fication aright, there would seem to be needed an equipment of science on pretty nearly all the laws of the universe. Astronomy, meteorology, geogra- Archeology: Ages of Metal, 25 phy are referred to in explaining geological forma- tions; natural physics and terrestrial physics; min- eralogy and chemistry; botany, zodlogy, physiology; comparative anatomy. Geology, in fact, is a sci- ence of induction which bases itself on all the or- ders of facts and on all the laws in the boundless field of nature. No doubt, within the restricted limits of the pres- ent question, that of the prehistoric antiquity of man, it does not lie open to all these uncertainties, because it does not appeal to so many exact sci- ences. Still, not being exempt from a limited sum of the scientific references, it remains hable toa moderate sum of the consequent uncertainties. In brief, geology is not the science to arrange an exact chronology for the prehistoric periods. Let us see if archeology has done so, or paleontology, or anthropology, strictly so called. 18. The archzological results are as follows. Prehistoric articles of industry have been found in great numbers; and numerous, too, are the localities in which they have been unearthed. There are stones, and bronzes, and cop- per; tools, chips and flints; there are places called Danish 47¢kken-moddings, and there are Swiss lake- dwellings; besides old hearths and camping-grounds, and caves and other holes in the earth. | 19. The reports from these and about them are summed up in the theory of what are called the ages of iron, bronze, copper, stone. Supposing Archeology. 26 Prehistoric Races. ourselves to be at present, as is evident, in an age of iron, we must go backward to where written or historic annals began to be dated over the greater part of Europe; and we come upon a prehistoric time, in which also it is found that iron was used. This is, therefore, reckoned a prior age of iron to our own, and is otherwise called the Halstattian age. In this most recent prehistoric period, various specimens of iron work and great swords of iron are found; also special types of workin bronze. There are ornaments and razors in bronze, vases and other objects done in Tuscan style. It is the time of burying under mounds, whether with or without cremation. 20. These iron implements, which are taken to denote an earlier age of iron, are found in England, France, Spain, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, Italy; in America; in Egypt, Western Asia, New Caledonia, the Isles of the Ocean. Bronze relics, which some take to mark an age of bronze, are found in most of the same European countries, in Egypt besides, as also in Mexico and Peru. Copper objects too are met with in North America. 21. There is a grave objection to this idea of an Objection to 28° being prehistoric, in any sense to theAgesof suit the purpose of evolution, if metal Metal. was used at all and worked as a material of industry. Metal is used in all modern times, and. requires advanced workmanship. Stone, as Ages of Metal. a Archeology: Ages of Metal. 27 being easier to grind or to chip, might antece- dently be regarded as the material for savage days. But we shall see that even stone has its uses at all times, within historic limits too; and, upon occa- sions, seems to be preferred. What ground can there be for dividing off a prehistoric age of metal? 22. If the ground is this—a preconceived theory that metallurgy, or the working of metals, must be found somewhere in an incipient and transitional state, following on a supposed earlier age of igno- rance and ape-like incapacity, we have only to re- mark that such a latent theory is, in the first place, a gratuitous postulate, assuming the very thing to be proved, if evolution is to be made to stand. In the second place, it is invalidated or contradicted by scientific and documentary evidence. For sci- entific explorations in Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, show the use of metals there so far back in the past that there is no warrant as yet for affirming the exist- ence of a previous age, either of stone or of any- thing else. And positive documentary history in- forms us that, in Asia, tools of bronze and iron were a product of industry as far back as Tubal-Cain, very long, indeed, before historic annals began to be dated over Europe. 23. As to bronze, in particular, authors consider themselves qualified to deny entirely that such an age existed anywhere. Perhaps, however, in a modified sense, that may be called an age of bronze g r , BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY mar Bronze. U is94 LIBRARY. 5S Prehistoric Races. which witnessed a great local development of this kind of metallurgy, as the rich stations of bronze- remains in those places seem to indicate. Or, at times, it would appear that bronze was specially imported into a certain country, as Egypt; or, gen- erally, becoming an article of commercial import- ance, it overspread Europe with Tuscan work. 24. But if this is all that the “age of bronze” comes to, or the “ age of iron,” then the analysis of history is making these prehistoric periods less dis- tinct, the more we know. It looks as if this ro- mance of a scientific generation were coming down to the homely synthesis of Moses, Homer and Livy, and as if the imposing term “ prehistoric,” which has been so vaguely magnificent in science, because so magnificently vague, were but a-new phrase for the old idea, “ Once upon a time!” equally obscure, but less pretentious. 25. Older than the age of the metals is that of stone, and, first, of polished or ground stone. This is otherwise called the neolithic, or newer stone age; the one to be men- tioned next being called paleolithic, or older stone period. The specimens of work which are referred to it are axes, chisels, etc., made of such materials as diorite, serpentine, basalt, quartzite. There are clay vessels, too, hand-made but elegant. In the artificial shell-deposits which are seen in Denmark, and are referred to this epoch, there are found tools of flint, horn and bone, fragments of a rude Neolithic Age. Archeology: Age of Polished Stone. 209 kind of pottery, charcoal and ashes, but no objects — of metal. The earlier great stone, or megalithic monuments of Europe, called dolmens, or cham- bered tumuli, belong to this period. 26. The men who lived then were not mere hunters; they were tillers of the soil. The bearing of this distinction will appear subsequently. Some are inclined to believe that the polished stone period was inaugurated in Europe by the spreading of a new population, in which they would recognize the first wave of Aryan immigration. That there was a sudden infusion of some new people is ren- dered plausible by the gap which is found in the process of transition from the implements of an earlier age to those which characterize this one: there is a want of intermediate forms to mark what. might be considered stages of evolution. Besides, there is noticed the presence now of divers species of domesticated animals, presumably brought by a new people from distant countries. 27. The lands, in which this neolithic age is dis- cerned, are the same European countries enumerated before for the age of iron; poets! "i along with North and South America, Terra del Fuego, Australia, New Caledonia, South Africa, the Isles of the Ocean. The oldest lake settlements of Switzerland belong to the same period. Many, however, of the settlements in the most Western Swiss lakes must have been flourish- ing rather late in history. For what do we find? 30 Prehistoric Races. There come to light various articles of bronze, weapons of iron, and even coins of Roman origin. Does this mean that the prehistoric age of polished stone is coeval with Roman history? It begins to appear that the prehistoric man of even the stone age was a man that trafficked, and perhaps fought, with the dread legionaries of the Roman republic, or perhaps the Roman empire. In fact, it dawns upon us, as scientific investigation advances from hazy theory into the broad light of ascertained re- sults, that he is only our well-known European cousin, or American, or Australasian, studied by other lights than those of written history; whom we have met often enough under a different name from the “ prehistoric’”’ in the pages of his contem- poraries, Herodotus, Livy, and even Tacitus, or writers later still. The dimness of our view in this study is owing to the fact that we are looking at him under the light of inductive or inferential evi- dence, not that of palpable observation, or docu- mentary record. 28. We may note, in passing, the different kinds of evidence that may be brought to bear on asubject. There is written history, which furnishes documentary evidence: this is the chief means of knowing our human family. There is pure theory, which carries with it a kind of spec- ulative light, to show the possibility of things being true. There is natural science, which proceeds by way of direct observation and experiment; and this Evidence. Archeology: Age of Rough Stone. 31 gives us evidence which is immediate and conclu- sive; but its application is limited to our surround- ings, and cannot reach into the past or future, or to things distant. To reach those things which do not fall under observation or experiment, natural science infers from what it does observe, from the _data which are thus supplied; but the evidence be- comes then only indirect and inferential. If any elements of mere theory or hypothesis are now added to the inferential process, evidence ceases and we have probability instead; and the final con- clusion partakes more and more of theoretic prob- ability, or even bare possibility, according as more elements of theory are inserted in the premises. And, if an ingredient of false theory is anywhere added, the final precipitate of the compound pro- cess will be anything but the truth. It may be an agreeable doctrine, popular, fair to see; but not true. 29. Older than the neolithic age, with its man of the ground and polished stone, is the paleolithic or ancient stone age, with its man of the chipped or flaked stone. He helped himself to what utensils or weapons he needed, by chipping rude stones into some shape or other of axes, lance-heads, or the like. The man of this time was probably a hunter or warrior, the van- guard of coming immigration. He was overtaken, apparently, by a period of such intense cold, that it reduced the greater part of Europe to the con- _ ditions of an Arctic climate, Paleolithic Age. 32 Prehistoric Races. 30. Among the theories devised to account for this Glacial cold period or glacial age, as to which it Epoch. is still dubious whether there was only one such spell, or more than one, the latest hypo- thesis, that of an Italian philosopher, connects it with the deluge, a phenomenon reported to us with the most exact documentary evidence. According to this theory, the glacial period coin- - cided with the flood, in the sense that the reign of ice was brought on by the causes which operated during or after the deluge. So that the deluge would have to be conceived as an event, which, either before or after or concomitantly, involved a revolution in all parts of the globe. And the part which we know of so well, as described by eye-wit- nesses in the Mosaic narrative, would then be merely one phase, one scene in a tragedy very great, one episode in a terrible drama that-involved the whole of our orb. How the paleolithic man dipped into the glacial age in Europe, we do not see distinctly stated; whether it was that, after the deluge, roaming far away from the cradle-lands of the family, he found himself in places suffering from this Arctic cold, and he became hopelessly ice-bound there; or that, according to another most recent speculation, the value of which is not yet determined, the flood of overflowing waters did not actually reach all parts of the earth; and he, in his own home, was enveloped in some of its mar- ginal phenomena, among which was this intense Epochs, Periods, Formations. 33 atmospheric cold. All these, however, are speci- mens of purely theoretic probabilities so far; the major part of the light to illumine them being noth- ing more than speculation. 31. Before the glacial period, which bound the zone of temperate Europe in fetters Of pyoens, ice, the climate in the same parts was Periods, most mild, and even tropical. The fos- Formations: _ sils of the tertiary age, which had just elapsed, ex- hibit palms, cypresses, plane-trees, fig-trees, laurels, cinnamon, all growing in the Northern, and even the Arctic regions. Then followed the glacial epoch with its chilly exhibition of phenomena, when even the South became Arctic, with Northern bears and mammoths prowling about, and men hid- ing themselves in holes. After that comes the quaternary period, which brings us to our own times, itself subdivided into two formations, the diluvial or post-pliocene, and the alluvial or re- cent. The prehistoric men whom we have been speaking of thus far, whether neolithic or palzo- lithic, are identified as diluvial, of quaternary times. These geological distinctions we mention because of this term “ diluvial,” as applied to the man whom we have been speaking of as palzolithic or neolithic. The other name for diluvial, that is, post-pliocene, is so conceived as referring to the last portion of the age which was previous to the quaternary, or fourth age, and which is therefore called tertiary, or the earlier, third age. This tertiary, like other 34. Prehistoric Races. ages, is subdivided into various geological forma- tions, of which the earliest is called eocene, and the latest pliocene. Thus, then, we are to under- stand terms: when we speak of alluvial or recent, and of diluvial or post-pliocene, we are in quatern- ary times; when we go back farther, crossing the glacial epoch, we come to tertiary times, with its various formations, the latest pliocene, the earliest eocene. And if we hear, therefore, as we shall soon, of a tertiary man, eocene or pliocene, we mean one of whom traces are found in the corresponding geological formations. While farther back still, if. an ancestor of ours existed in the ages of the sec- ondary or primary formations, he would be called by a corresponding designation. There is no ques- tion of such a being. 32. The results of all the archeology brought to bear upon prehistoric humanity is to discredit the idea that the human being then was of a different species from the human being now. ‘The diluvial man’s relative de- gree of civilization marks no specific difference be- tween him and ourselves. We might as well think of classifying the Asiatic mountaineer of to-day among things and men prehistoric. For the dwell- ers on Mount Roraima are just now described as persisting in the manufacture of stone implements; at a time, too, when every possible advance in art and industry is being made elsewhere, with the help of steam, electricity and all manners of inven- Results of Archeology. Results of Archeology. (35 tion. Yet the said Asiatic is quite like the rest of us. Nor are we, by implication, very much in a state of barbarism, because we live contemporane- ously with the stone age of Mount Roraima, 1888. And, in general, most nations have been found to use stone in the course of their history, the Israel- ites, Egyptians, Romans, the Indians, the Germans, the Lombards and Anglo-Saxons. Wherefore, the archeological ages of stone and metal seem to have been only relative, partial, local. Relative, too, and partial, is the antiquity which they indicate. And if there is any evolution in the question, it is only that of the sequence of stages in some nation’s local development. To despatch all the literature pertaining to dilu- vial man, we need add but little more. He has, indeed, played a conspicuous part in the hypothesis of evolution; and he still figures prominently in magazines and reviews for the entertainment of cultured classes, as also in the preliminary notions of children’s text-books of history. We ought not, then, to close our obituary notice of him, without satisfying the reasonable curiosity of future genera- tions. We shall just briefly look into the two re- maining chapters of his record. And as, upon his withdrawal, his place was boldly aspired to by what is called the tertiary man, we shall say a word upon him also. The two chapters to which we refer are the paleontology and the anthropology of the di- luvial or quaternary man, 36 Prehistoric Races. 33. Paleontology, or the science of extinct or- ganic life, has shown usa series of animals which ex- isted a long time ago; which were con- temporaneous with man; and which have now died out. ‘This seems to indicate a very re- mote antiquity for the prehistoric man who lived with them. Consider the long series of the cave- bear, the cave-hyzna, the mammoth, the woolly rhinoceros, the hippopotamus major, the Irish elk, and such like beasts. Their presence in prehistoric man’s time is betrayed by genuine fossils, or the remains of their bony structures, which, whether petrified or not, have been unearthed, or dug up, that is to say, are “fossil.” And that man lived with them is shown by his industrial remains, or his own bones being found among theirs. All these species of animals are now extinct; and how far away in the past must the man coeval with them have lived and died! “ One’s head is seized with dizziness !” is the reflection of the modern thinker, M. Renan: Ox est pris de vertige ! 34. Scientists, however, criticizing this point a little, have merely asked some pertinent questions: How long does it take a species to die? Whatever time it may take, did these species wait for another, and gracefully walk off the stage, each in its turn? Suppose the environment did become unfit for them, and this, indeed, was the chief cause of their extinction, must it have been quite slow in becoming so? Or, Paleontology. Extinction of Species. Paleontology: Extinction of Spectes. 37 does all science admit that great convulsions took place over the globe, great cataclysms which changed abruptly all the features of localities and of whole countries? Or, let us with great liberality suppose that the whole number of species now ex- tinct, among which man lived then, amounted to almost a hundred; and that they chose to die out gracefully, one at a time; and that the species were content with half a century each for its obsequies; how many years would that require? Less than five thousand; not so far back as some chronologi- cal tables put the birth of Noe. As to their being found petrified and preserved in soils, and rocks, that does not prove the lapse of tens of thousands of years. It proves a little chemistry paying them a tribute, which is due to their remains, no doubt, but is not at all relevant to the question of their antiquity. Besides, scientists point out species that die out, right under our eyes, and that too rapidly enough; as the ddus and dinornis of the islands Bourbon and Mauritius. 35. The animals with which men lived have served some observers as a guide to distinguish pre- historic times into three epochs. First, that of the great cave-bear; secondly, that of the mammoth; thirdly, that of the reindeer. This succession, however, being ill-substantiated, gave way to an archeological classification, taken from the stations in which in- dustrial remains were found. Four periods have Subdivisions of the Ages. 38 Prehistoric Races. thus been named respectively from St. Acheul, Moustiers, Solutré, La Madeleine. 36. Anthropology, strictly so called, considers the prehistoric man himself; and, finding in certain Anthropol- fossil bones and skulls a type of man- . ogy: kind very different, as it appears, from the normal type of the present, it has supplied the evolutionary theory with an important link in the question of our descent. Various signs are noted in those skulls, indicative of an inferiority to the man of our time, physically as well, no doubt, as intellectually. Those found in the caverns of Engis and Neanderthal have become famous, if only for the number of scientific monographs writ- ten upon them, to show forth the low state of hu- manity exhibited in their conformation. For in- stance, they are dolichocephalous, that is to say, long-headed; the longitudinal diameter being ab- normally longer than the transverse diameter. Many other points besides this are brought to bear, anthropologically, on the question of our descent; which is so illumined, in consequence, that, not to mention others, Max Bartels has brought together, in a monograph of nearly one hundred pages, the literature and notices of men with tails. We must confess that we have not made any closer acquaint- ance with this valuable work than to read the bib- liographical record of it in the Smithsonian report for 1885. But that does not dispense us from pay- Anthropology: Physical Varteties. 30 ing a due regard and close attention to the points which anthropology has noted in these skulls. 37. The first observation that occurs is this. No sooner was dolichocephalism, or long-headedness, noted, than a comparison was instituted at once, in the interests of science, with the actual races of mankind, of which we shall treat expressly in the second part. And it was found that existing men show every type and meas- urement, as well of this cranial conformation, as of its opposite, brachycephalism, and of every other. M. de Quatrefages transcribes long lists of measure- ments which show this. In the second place, a number of other anatomical elements, thought to be peculiar in these fossil skulls, such as the super- ciliary prominences, the small and receding forehead, the form of the ciliary arcs, the amplitude of the occiput, are found to be but the individual and ac- cidental varieties of men living amongus. Neither the low-minded amongst us, nor the high-minded, nor even distinctive eminence in cultivation and genius has appropriated any exclusive form of cra- nium. The formcanbe modified before birth, and the peculiarities become congenital. It can be modified after death, and they are posthumous; physical and chemical agents so far affecting the skeleton as to change the proportions. Other causes operate during life; and they are either arti- ficial in their nature, as the forced compression of the skull, a practice still holding among certain Physical Varieties. 4O Prehistoric Races. tribes; or they are natural, as heat, light, actinism, moisture, atmospheric contamination, drink, food, resources, scenery, degree of natural security, con- sanguineous marriages, sickness, and the like. It would appear that a great many elements were necessary to conclude a logical argument here. In the absence of the argument, what becomes of our poor savage species, the ape-man, who yet must be found somewhere, if evolution is to hold its ground ? 38. There is one resource left. Ifthe diluvial man of quaternary times is nowhere at the service of evolution, perhaps a tertiary man of the times gone before would be so, if only he could be found. To the satisfaction of a goodly number of scientists, French, German and others, such a prehistoric being of the tertiary age, both phocene and eocene, has been found, and that several times over. Not that he himself has quite shown himself. His friends admit that. But he is hypothetical in other things, which certainly have been found. To find himself then is only a ques- tion of time, when a future day will reveal him; and faith in the vindication of science is long-suf- fering enough to await that day in patience. The things, in which the tertiary man has betrayed him- self, are flint-chips, and flints burnt, and irregular incisions made in the bones of animals, all of which are found in tertiary formations, and belong to ter- tiary times, and therefore—reveal a tertiary man. Tertiary Man. Anthropology: The Tertiary Man. AI 39. It is a little singular, on the face of it, that his own bones do not appear just as readily as theirs. ‘There is no natural law requiring the more rapid consumption of human bones than of beasts’ bones. If one kind are fossilized, why not the other? Cuvier demonstrated that the bones of an- client warriors show no more readiness to decom- pose than those of their horses. 40. Still, not to be wanting to the true spirit of scientific thought, let us contemplate those flints or stones of the tertiary age, some with what is called a conchoidal fracture or a bulb of percussion in them, such as would result from an intentional blow, and therefore indicating a person who intended the blow; some apparently scorched, as having their outer surface disintegrated; and therefore indicat- ing a person who scorched them. Now, we are to consider these signs as being so indifferent in their character, that they point indeed to a man who made them, but they postulate only an ape-man, an _ anthropitheque, one who knew just enough to do that, but knew no more and knew no better. This is the logic which satisfied the French scientists in the gathering at Grenoble; and they agreed by vote that the existence of a tertiary being was now proved. 41. Wecannot help thinking that other scientists, of quite an opposite school, have some ground to be well pleased with this course of reasoning. The form of the logic used impresses the mind favor- 42 Prehistoric Races. ably. We fancy that we see in it a strong reassur- ance of some general revival in sound logic and solid thought. For if, froma chance percussion in a chance stone, such a fracture as appears over and over again on our roadways, made by the hoofs of horses, or by the rolling of wheels, the sagacious minds of men can discern the presence of an unknown being whom no other sign manifests, and can just measure his intellectual capacity and portray his physical build, it is quite evident that many of the noblest sciences are in a fair way to being reinstated. And, as for teleology in particular, as for theism and theology generally, the good time is coming when no man’s mind will fail to see, in the marks of beautiful order impressed on the world and the uni- verse, a magnificent testimony to the existence of One who must have intended it, and made it, and almost a description of Him, who having made it, is now preserving and governing it. So much for the form of the argument, or the manner of the logic. 42. Nowawordonits matter. It has been asked, in a somewhat critical spirit, whether similarly broken stones, which are found to be scattered about on a_ shingly beach, argue the presence of men all about there to do the breaking? Again, M. Arcelin, a French scientist, most prehistoric in his tastes and specialties, picks up, in the argillaceous silex of Form of the Logie. Matter of the Logic. Anthropology: The Tertiary Man. 43 the Maconnais, flints of precisely this description, with the fracture which is thought to reveal an in- tentional act of breaking, and yet which is referable in this case to atmospheric agents. Besides, were there no hoofs, no tramping, no rolling, no crashing, in the days of the great mammalians, and among the gigantic disturbances of past ages; when inthe ordinary flow of those mighty volumes of water, that eroded the primitive beds of rivers, the col- lapsing of huge blocks of silex brought about col- lisions, more than are needed for myriads of con- choidal fractures and bulbs of percussion to be laid out on the bottom of the waters? Again, if any tertiary man broke some of the flints, he must’ have lived at the bottom of the sea to do it; for those exhibited by M. Cels, just recently, to the Anthropological Society of Brussels, by way of proving the tertiary man’s existence, are taken from lower eocene sediments which are observed to be altogether marine, containing mollusks, fishes, chel- onians, and the like. 43. Nor does the disintegration of the surface in a flint seem to be due to fire alone. If it is, how- ever, were there no prairie fires, no forest fires, breaking out spontaneously then, as they do now? 44. And, again, if we inspect those fossil bones of animals, with the irregular incisions made in them, are we inclined to believe that a man only — could make an incision, particularly an irregular one? It may be that wild beasts preyed upon one © 4A Prehistoric Races. another then, as they do somewhat freely now, and that with teeth which could scrape one another’s bones pretty incisively. Scientific men go to the trouble of pointing out effective teeth of that age, such as seem to suit the incisions exactly, those of the lusty beasts called carcharodon megalodon, sargus serratus, and others. These dreadful names insinu- ate nothing but teeth! In fine, the critics urge the importunate question: Did the beasts of prey spare man himself, and not scrape his bones for him? If so, where are they,—be they scraped or un- scraped ? 45. It is easy to ask questions, and for irreverent minds to ask irrevent ones. But professors of Ber- lin, and scientists of the French school itself, nimble as that school is in its logic and its fancy, have thought it was rather easy to make random statements, and scandalize science by settling things with a vote. If things are true, they need no vote. And the only result of the pronounced discredit which this controversy has thrown upon the tertiary unknown, is to show him unknowable, probably because he is not there. Twenty years of contention about him have left him where so many are leaving the missing link generally; and that is nowhere. 46. It really makes very little difference where the first appearance of man is placed, and how it came about, if only he was there. We shail learn much that is useful, when we ascertain where it was, in the Voting in Science. Man and the Universe. AS order of geological formation, that he did first ap- pear on this globe. He will throw as much light on geology and the other sciences as they throw on him. At present, he is not shown to have walked this earth at any point farther back than the diluvial period; as M. d’Estienne just now affirms,“ there is no geologist of note who admits any longer even the possibility of man having existed in the lower tertiary age.” General considerations forbid us to expect that we shall ever find it shown. For, if man is the head and completion of the physical and organic world, as all admit, and evolutionists no less than others, he could not appear till the physical conditions of things, and both the vegetable and animal kingdoms, had received their just development. As competent science affirms, he must be the last in both the stratigraphical and the palzontological lines. Be- fore that, he were an anachronism. 47. So, to conclude this criticism of the prehis- toric ape-man, whose geography and chronology we ' have subjected to a little analysis, we may express ourselves in the fine gen- eralization of Agassiz. He says that, as the reptiles of the secondary age are in no respect descended from the fishes of the primary or palezo- zoic age, so man in the fourth or quaternary nowise descends from the animals before him in the third or tertiary period. The link by which they are all connected is of a higher and immaterial nature. Man and Geology. Man and the Universe. 46 Prehistoric Races. Their connection is to be sought for in the view of the Creator Himself, whose aim in forming the earth, in allowing it to undergo the successive changes which geology points out, and in creating successively all the different types of animals which have passed away, was to introduce Man on the surface of the globe. Man is the end towards which all the animal creation has tended from the first appearance of the palzozoic fishes. We have finished with prehistoric humanity. We shall review next, in a more constructive spirit, the anthropology of the actual races which are; and shall find in them the key to all the pe difficulty which has been. ANTHROPOLOGY .—Continuea. CHAPTER: iH: ~ ACTUAL RACES IN HISTORY. 48. We have considered whether, in the past, there ever existed a species of men, different from that which we know of now. This was the ques- tion of prehistoric anthropology. It still remains to be seen whether, in historic times, any man of a different species from our own has existed, and can exhibit in his person the link which is sought for to connect us with a lower order of animals. The most imperfect races of mankind are judged to be those in Australia, and others, such as the Bushmen, in Africa. But these are now pro- nounced, by the most unexceptionable science of the day, to be altogether men of our own organiza- tion. So that, if we go by the authority of scien- tific men, the question is closed. ‘There is not, and there has not been, any species of mankind distinct from the one which we know. All men are, and have been, of one formation, one organi- zation, whether they are looked at anatomically, physiologically, or intellectually. 47 48 Actual Races in Htstory. 49. But if, instead of merely taking the authori- ty of scientific men, we examine the scientific re- sults for ourselves, we shall derive profit in two ways. On the one hand, we can enjoy the ad- vantage of seeing the facts for ourselves, and of concluding that there is no color whatever, in the observations of science, for the hypothesis of an ape-man. On the other hand, a philosophical view opens out before us regarding the course of man’s progress upon earth. We are thrown back into the same vein of thought with which we started, that evolution of man’s history, from its origin onwards, through its varied and divergent course. We con- template down many an avenue and vista of human history thus distributed over the face of the globe, and down through the ages of time, how the whole progress, so divergent to begin with, is converging towards a final reunion of the human family, when God’s designs shall have received their entire ac- complishment over the children of men. This is a physical side to man’s ethical and intellectual history. Itis credited to the science of anthro- pology. ) 50. Let us observe, then, that in the collection of individuals, called mankind, there are many differences, as well anatomical and physiological, as intellectual and moral. Organs and functions, ways of thinking and acting, are all found to be diversified in various natural groups, which are called Races. Now, what do we affirm? That, in The Terms, Species, Race. 49 spite of all differences, the races are of one Species. And, moreover, being of one species, they are in- ferred to have had one common origin; which, in biological matters, means that they’ sprang from one primitive pair. If this is so, scientific evidence corroborates, with its process of induction, the doc- umentary evidence presented in the narrative of Moses. We begin by recurring to biology (No. 104, etc., below) for the explanation of these terms: species, race. Then we shall apply them to the subject of anthropology. 51. By the term, species, we mean a collection of organic individuals more or less resembling one another, in their external aspect or in- ternal structure; productive in _ their unions among themselves, so that they perpetuate the same collection in nature, by generat- ing other individuals of their own kind; and one of the consequences thereof is, that originally all can have descended from one primitive pair, identical in kind with them. This description of species, which is evidently founded in nature, and is exemplified in the whole of biology, is not to be confounded with another use of the term, species, whereby it is taken to signify any mere class. Thus, a distinguished paleontologist, attached to the U. S. Geological Service, uses the term, as if in biology we signified by it any mere group. We classify, he says, organ- ic beings, as we would classify bottles; and there- fore, he concludes, there is no reason why one The Term, Species. 50 Actual Races in History. species should not turn into another, by what is called “‘ descent,” or “transformation of species;” just as among bottles we can reassort classes, and have in one group to-day the bottles which we had > in a different group yesterday. Here we must re- mark that the term, species, is taken in quite a different meaning from what it must have if we are to discuss at all the question of the descent of species. And indeed any one arguing so, on this subject, commits the logical error which is called equivocation, that is, playing on the same word in two different senses. Considering the scientific and philosophical gravity of this error or sophism in particular, we should desire nothing more than to see it first pilloried, and then petrified in every text-book of grammar, rhetoric and logic to the end of time; till a future age of anthropologists shall unearth it, and wonder wisely, what kind of pre- historic barbarians devised such a fossil piece of industry, and made it, and used it. 52. In the scientific idea of species, it is not any resemblance that determines the class. The like- The Test of ness among individuals may be more or Species. less. It may be lost so far im appareme unlikenesses, that other beings of a different species may come closer to the type, in appearance, than organisms of really the same species; as in all classes of things we see that extremes touch, or even overlap one another. In biology, it is a lke- ness indeed that determines the species; but it is a The Terms, Species, Race. 51 radical and primary likeness, one so deep as to be tested by nothing less than a deep-seated physio- logical-or vital function, which of course is a radical quality. All physiological qualities are deeper than morphological proportions, or anatomical structure; these latter do not exist but for the former; exter- nal proportions and structure and the organs of life do not exist, but for the vital or physiological functions to be performed through them. If there is any precedence between physiological function and organic structure, it 1s not the organ that is prior to the function, but the function that is prior to the structure, and is the reason for its _ existence. 53. Now, there is a function of reproduction, whereby a living organism reproduces its kind. This is a law in every order of living things: “ Like produces like,” s¢mle generat simile. If that class only of living beings is called a species, which can unite and reproduce its kind, you see a physi- ological quality is referred to, very different from the external likeness among bottles, which Pro- fessor Cope offers to define species by; or the structural likeness between man and the ape, whereby other Professors suggest that species should be determined. The power of reproduc- ing its kind, or generative productiveness, is the test of species. 54. In biology, they would illustrate the matter thus. The animal class called the horse has prop- 52 Actual Races in Fitstory. agated itself from time immemorial. So has the ass. The mule never yet—perhaps to our great relief. Horses are a species. So are asses. But the hybrid mule, which is a cross-breed between the horse and the ass, is not a species. Hence we see that organisms can exist without constituting a species of their own. Others exist, and do make a perpetual family of their own. While no families ever pass over from one line of propagation to another, giving us what 1s called a descent, or trans- formation of species. ‘This we shall see in biology. 55. The idea of race is much easier to apprehend. It originates in the fact that every species admits of varying traits in the individual, as dis- tinguished from any other of the same species. Indeed, no two individuals are in all respects alike. The specific likeness, remaining common to all,is modified accidentally. Now, these accidental modifications may keep within certain normal limits, usual in the species; or they may be exaggerated or diminished, moving in a positive or negative direction, outside of a usual area of un- dulation, observed in that species. So doing, they become exceptional. And the individual which bears an exceptional character of this kind is called a Variety. Should this variety transmit its peculiar modifications to other individuals, by way of descent, there results a line of posterity marked with an hereditary divergence from the common type. «§ THOMAS L. GRACE, Bishop of St. Paul.” “. . The study of the ‘* Curistian MoTuHeEr ”’ would be a great help to many a mother, in the work of their own sanctification, as well as in he education of their children. y« E. O'CONNELL, Bishop of Grass Valley.” “*. . . It possesses the great advantage of being very practical, as it proposes nothing extraordinary, nothing to interfere with the ordinary discharge of parents’ domestic and family duties. ... JOHN McEVILLY, Bishop of Galway and Coadjutor of Tuam. “. . . The little book should be introduced into every Catholic family, for the instruction of parents as well as children, wherefore we earnestly recommend it. y« JOHN VERTIN, Bishop of Marquette. ‘“T am well pleased with it, and would like to see it in the hands of every Christian mother. ... ZEGIDIUS YUNGER, Bishop of Nesqually.” BENZIGER BROTHERS, New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago. T; eres hs wee Sees] = Sati Poe Yao” ert > 2 >So coey Cer Soo BEINN OP: NSE, a- SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES UHR LATA 3 9088 00587 3963