Sign Language Among North American Indians Compared With That Among Other Peoples And Deaf-Mutes

by Garrick Mallery · English · Gutenberg #17451 · 762,425 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Sign Language Among North American Indians Compared With That Among Other Peoples And Deaf-Mutes

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: Sign Language Among North American Indians Compared With That Among Other Peoples And Deaf-Mutes

Author: Garrick Mallery

Release date: January 3, 2006 [eBook #17451]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17451

Credits: Produced by William Flis, and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by the
Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica) at
http://gallica.bnf.fr)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SIGN LANGUAGE AMONG NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS COMPARED WITH THAT AMONG OTHER PEOPLES AND DEAF-MUTES ***

Produced by William Flis, and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by the
Bibliotheque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica) at
http://gallica.bnf.fr)

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.

J.W. POWELL, DIRECTOR.

SIGN LANGUAGE

AMONG

NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS

COMPARED WITH THAT AMONG OTHER PEOPLES AND DEAF-MUTES.

GARRICK MALLERY.

* * * * *

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

FIG. PAGE

61. Affirmation, approving. Old Roman 286
62. Approbation. Neapolitan 286
63. Affirmation, approbation. N.A. Indian 286
64. Group. Old Greek. Facing 289
65. Negation. Dakota 290
66. Love. Modern Neapolitan 290
67. Group. Old Greek. Facing 290
68. Hesitation. Neapolitan 291
69. Wait. N.A. Indian 291
70. Question, asking. Neapolitan 291
71. Tell me. N.A. Indian 291
72. Interrogation. Australian 291
73. Pulcinella 292
74. Thief. Neapolitan 292
75. Steal. N.A. Indian 293
76. Public writer. Neapolitan group. Facing 296
77. Money. Neapolitan 297
78. "Hot Corn." Neapolitan Group. Facing 297
79. "Horn" sign. Neapolitan 298
80. Reproach. Old Roman 298
81. Marriage contract. Neapolitan group. Facing 298
82. Negation. Pai-Ute sign 299
83. Coming home of bride. Neapolitan group. Facing 299
84. Pretty. Neapolitan 300
85. "Mano in fica." Neapolitan 300
86. Snapping the fingers. Neapolitan 300
87. Joy, acclamation 300
88. Invitation to drink wine 300
89. Woman's quarrel. Neapolitan Group. Facing 301
90. Chestnut vender. Facing 301
91. Warning. Neapolitan 302
92. Justice. Neapolitan 302
93. Little. Neapolitan 302
94. Little. N.A. Indian 302
95. Little. N.A. Indian 302
96. Demonstration. Neapolitan 302
97. "Fool." Neapolitan 303
98. "Fool." Ib. 303
99. "Fool." Ib. 303
100. Inquiry. Neapolitan 303
101. Crafty, deceitful. Neapolitan 303
102. Insult. Neapolitan 304
103. Insult. Neapolitan 304
104. Silence. Neapolitan 304
105. Child. Egyptian hieroglyph 304
106. Negation. Neapolitan 305
107. Hunger. Neapolitan 305
108. Mockery. Neapolitan 305
109. Fatigue. Neapolitan 305
110. Deceit. Neapolitan 305
111. Astuteness, readiness. Neapolitan 305
112. Tree. Dakota, Hidatsa 343
113. To grow. N.A. Indian 343
114. Rain. Shoshoni, Apache 344
115. Sun. N.A. Indian 344
116. Sun. Cheyenne 344
117. Soldier. Arikara 345
118. No, negation. Egyptian 355
119. Negation. Maya 356
120. Nothing. Chinese 356
121. Child. Egyptian figurative 356
122. Child. Egyptian linear 356
123. Child. Egyptian hieratic 356
124. Son. Ancient Chinese 356
125. Son. Modern Chinese 356
126. Birth. Chinese character 356
127. Birth. Dakota 356
128. Birth, generic. N.A. Indians 357
129. Man. Mexican 357
130. Man. Chinese character 357
131. Woman. Chinese character 357
132. Woman. Ute 357
133. Female, generic. Cheyenne 357
134. To give water. Chinese character 357
135. Water, to drink. N.A. Indian 357
136. Drink. Mexican 357
137. Water. Mexican 357
138. Water, giving. Egypt 358
139. Water. Egyptian 358
140. Water, abbreviated 358
141. Water. Chinese character 358
142. To weep. Ojibwa pictograph 358
143. Force, vigor. Egyptian 358
144. Night. Egyptian 358
145. Calling upon. Egyptian figurative 359
146. Calling upon. Egyptian linear 359
147. To collect, to unite. Egyptian 359
148. Locomotion. Egyptian figurative 359
149. Locomotion. Egyptian linear 359
150. Shu[n]'-ka Lu'-ta. Dakota 365
151. "I am going to the east." Abnaki 369
152. "Am not gone far." Abnaki 369
153. "Gone far." Abnaki 370
154. "Gone five days' journey." Abnaki 370
155. Sun. N.A. Indian 370
156. Sun. Egyptian 370
157. Sun. Egyptian 370
158. Sun with rays. Ib. 371
159. Sun with rays. Ib. 371
160. Sun with rays. Moqui pictograph 371
161. Sun with rays. Ib. 371
162. Sun with rays. Ib. 371
163. Sun with rays. Ib. 371
164. Star. Moqui pictograph 371
165. Star. Moqui pictograph 371
166. Star. Moqui pictograph 371
167. Star. Moqui pictograph 371
168. Star. Peruvian pictograph 371
169. Star. Ojibwa pictograph 371
170. Sunrise. Moqui do. 371
171. Sunrise. Ib. 371
172. Sunrise. Ib. 371
173. Moon, month. Californian pictograph 371
174. Pictograph, including sun. Coyotero Apache 372
175. Moon. N.A. Indian 372
176. Moon. Moqui pictograph 372
177. Moon. Ojibwa pictograph 372
178. Sky. Ib. 372
179. Sky. Egyptian character 372
180. Clouds. Moqui pictograph 372
181. Clouds. Ib. 372
182. Clouds. Ib. 372
183. Cloud. Ojibwa pictograph 372
184. Rain. New Mexican pictograph 373
185. Rain. Moqui pictograph 373
186. Lightning. Moqui pictograph 373
187. Lightning. Ib. 373
188. Lightning, harmless. Pictograph at Jemez, N.M. 373
189. Lightning, fatal. Do. 373
190. Voice. "The-Elk-that-hollows-walking" 373
191. Voice. Antelope. Cheyenne drawing 373
192. Voice, talking. Cheyenne drawing 374
193. Killing the buffalo. Cheyenne drawing 375
194. Talking. Mexican pictograph 376
195. Talking, singing. Maya character 376
196. Hearing ears. Ojibwa pictograph 376
197. "I hear, but your words are from a bad heart." Ojibwa 376
198. Hearing serpent. Ojibwa pictograph 376
199. Royal edict. Maya 377
200. To kill. Dakota 377
201. "Killed Arm." Dakota 377
202. Pictograph, including "kill." Wyoming Ter. 378
203. Pictograph, including "kill." Wyoming Ter. 378
204. Pictograph, including "kill." Wyoming Ter. 379
205. Veneration. Egyptian character 379
206. Mercy. Supplication, favor. Egyptian 379
207. Supplication. Mexican pictograph 380
208. Smoke. Ib. 380
209. Fire. Ib. 381
210. "Making medicine." Conjuration. Dakota 381
211. Meda. Ojibwa pictograph 381
212. The God Knuphis. Egyptian 381
213. The God Knuphis. Ib. 381
214. Power. Ojibwa pictograph 381
215. Meda's Power. Ib. 381
216. Trade pictograph 382
217. Offering. Mexican pictograph 382
218. Stampede of horses. Dakota 382
219. Chapultepec. Mexican pictograph 383
220. Soil. Ib. 383
221. Cultivated soil. Ib. 383
222. Road, path. Ib. 383
223. Cross-roads and gesture sign. Mexican pictograph 383
224. Small-pox or measles. Dakota 383
225. "No thoroughfare." Pictograph 383
226. Raising of war party. Dakota 384
227. "Led four war parties." Dakota drawing 384
228. Sociality. Friendship. Ojibwa pictograph 384
229. Peace. Friendship. Dakota 384
230. Peace. Friendship with whites. Dakota 385
231. Friendship. Australian 385
232. Friend. Brule Dakota 386
233. Lie, falsehood. Arikara 393
234. Antelope. Dakota 410
235. Running Antelope. Personal totem 410
236. Bad. Dakota 411
237. Bear. Cheyenne 412
238. Bear. Kaiowa, etc. 413
239. Bear. Ute 413
240. Bear. Moqui pictograph 413
241. Brave. N.A. Indian 414
242. Brave. Kaiowa, etc. 415
243. Brave. Kaiowa, etc. 415
244. Chief. Head of tribe. Absaroka 418
245. Chief. Head of tribe. Pai-Ute 418
246. Chief of a band. Absaroka and Arikara 419
247. Chief of a band. Pai-Ute 419
248. Warrior. Absaroka, etc. 420
249. Ojibwa gravestone, including "dead" 422
250. Dead. Shoshoni and Banak 422
251. Dying. Kaiowa, etc. 424
252. Nearly dying. Kaiowa 424
253. Log house. Hidatsa 428
254. Lodge. Dakota 430
255. Lodge. Kaiowa, etc. 431
256. Lodge. Sahaptin 431
257. Lodge. Pai-Ute 431
258. Lodge. Pai-Ute 431
259. Lodge. Kutchin 431
260. Horse. N.A. Indian 434
261. Horse. Dakota 434
262. Horse. Kaiowa, etc. 435
263. Horse. Caddo 435
264. Horse. Pima and Papago 435
265. Horse. Ute 435
266. Horse. Ute 435
267. Saddling a horse. Ute 437
268. Kill. N.A. Indian 438
269. Kill. Mandan and Hidatsa 439
270. Negation. No. Dakota 441
271. Negation. No. Pai-Ute 442
272. None. Dakota 443
273. None. Australian 444
274. Much, quantity. Apache 447
275. Question. Australian 449
276. Soldier. Dakota and Arikara 450
277. Trade. Dakota 452
278. Trade. Dakota 452
279. Buy. Ute 453
280. Yes, affirmation. Dakota 456
281. Absaroka tribal sign. Shoshoni 458
282. Apache tribal sign. Kaiowa, etc. 459
283. Apache tribal sign. Pima and Papago 459
284. Arikara tribal sign. Arapaho and Dakota 461
285. Arikara tribal sign. Absaroka 461
286. Blackfoot tribal sign. Dakota 463
287. Blackfoot tribal sign. Shoshoni 464
288. Caddo tribal sign. Arapaho and Kaiowa 464
289. Cheyenne tribal sign. Arapaho and Cheyenne 464
290. Dakota tribal sign. Dakota 467
291. Flathead tribal sign. Shoshoni 468
292. Kaiowa tribal sign. Comanche 470
293. Kutine tribal sign. Shoshoni 471
294. Lipan tribal sign. Apache 471
295. Pend d'Oreille tribal sign. Shoshoni 473
296. Sahaptin or Nez Perce tribal sign. Comanche 473
297. Shoshoni tribal sign. Shoshoni 474
298. Buffalo. Dakota 477
299. Eagle Tail. Arikara 477
300. Eagle Tail. Moqui pictograph 477
301. Give me. Absaroka 480
302. Counting. How many? Shoshoni and Banak 482
303. I am going home. Dakota 485
304. Question. Apache 486
305. Shoshoni tribal sign. Shoshoni 486
306. Chief. Shoshoni 487
307. Cold, winter, year. Apache 487
308. "Six." Shoshoni 487
309. Good, very well. Apache 487
310. Many. Shoshoni 488
311. Hear, heard. Apache 488
312. Night. Shoshoni 489
313. Rain. Shoshoni 489
314. See each other. Shoshoni 490
315. White man, American. Dakota 491
316. Hear, heard. Dakota 492
317. Brother. Pai-Ute 502
318. No, negation. Pai-Ute 503
319. Scene of Na-wa-gi-jig's story. Facing 508
320. We are friends. Wichita 521
321. Talk, talking. Wichita 521
322. I stay, or I stay right here. Wichita 521
323. A long time. Wichita 522
324. Done, finished. Do. 522
325. Sit down. Australian 523
326. Cut down. Wichita 524
327. Wagon. Wichita 525
328. Load upon. Wichita 525
329. White man; American. Hidatsa 526
330. With us. Hidatsa 526
331. Friend. Hidatsa 527
332. Four. Hidatsa 527
333. Lie, falsehood. Hidatsa 528
334. Done, finished. Hidatsa 528
335. Peace, friendship. Hualpais. Facing 530
336. Question, ans'd by tribal sign for Pani. Facing 531
337. Buffalo discovered. Dakota. Facing 532
338. Discovery. Dakota. Facing 533
339. Success of war party. Pima. Facing 538
340. Outline for arm positions, full face 545
341. Outline for arm positions, profile 545
342a. Types of hand positions, A to L 547
342b. Types of hand positions, M to Y 548
343. Example. To cut with an ax 550
344. Example. A lie 550
345. Example. To ride 551
346. Example. I am going home 551

* * * * *

SIGN LANGUAGE

AMONG

NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS

COMPARED WITH THAT AMONG OTHER PEOPLES AND DEAF-MUTES.

* * * * *

BY GARRICK MALLERY.

* * * * *

INTRODUCTORY.

During the past two years the present writer has devoted the intervals
between official duties to collecting and collating materials for
the study of sign language. As the few publications on the general
subject, possessing more than historic interest, are meager in details
and vague in expression, original investigation has been necessary.
The high development of communication by gesture among the tribes
of North America, and its continued extensive use by many of them,
naturally directed the first researches to that continent, with the
result that a large body of facts procured from collaborators and
by personal examination has now been gathered and classified. A
correspondence has also been established with many persons in other
parts of the world whose character and situation rendered it probable
that they would contribute valuable information. The success of
that correspondence has been as great as could have been expected,
considering that most of the persons addressed were at distant points
sometimes not easily accessible by mail. As the collection of facts
is still successfully proceeding, not only with reference to foreign
peoples and to deaf-mutes everywhere, but also among some American
tribes not yet thoroughly examined in this respect, no exposition of
the subject pretending to be complete can yet be made. In complying,
therefore, with the request to prepare the present paper, it is
necessary to explain to correspondents and collaborators whom it may
reach, that this is not the comprehensive publication by the Bureau
of Ethnology for which their assistance has been solicited. With this
explanation some of those who have already forwarded contributions
will not be surprised at their omission, and others will not desist
from the work in which they are still kindly engaged, under the
impression that its results will not be received in time to meet with
welcome and credit. On the contrary, the urgent appeal for aid before
addressed to officers of the Army and Navy of this and other nations,
to missionaries, travelers, teachers of deaf-mutes, and philologists
generally, is now with equal urgency repeated. It is, indeed, hoped
that the continued presentation of the subject to persons either
having opportunity for observation or the power to favor with
suggestions may, by awakening some additional interest in it, secure
new collaboration from localities still unrepresented.

It will be readily understood by other readers that, as the limits
assigned to this paper permit the insertion of but a small part of the
material already collected and of the notes of study made upon
that accumulation, it can only show the general scope of the work
undertaken, and not its accomplishment. Such extracts from the
collection have been selected as were regarded as most illustrative,
and they are preceded by a discussion perhaps sufficient to be
suggestive, though by no means exhaustive, and designed to be for
popular, rather than for scientific use. In short, the direction to
submit a progress-report and not a monograph has been complied with.

DIVISIONS OF GESTURE SPEECH.

These are corporeal motion and facial expression. An attempt has been
made by some writers to discuss these general divisions separately,
and its success would be practically convenient if it were always
understood that their connection is so intimate that they can never
be altogether severed. A play of feature, whether instinctive or
voluntary, accentuates and qualifies all motions intended to serve
as signs, and strong instinctive facial expression is generally
accompanied by action of the body or some of its members. But, so
far as a distinction can be made, expressions of the features are the
result of emotional, and corporeal gestures, of intellectual action.
The former in general and the small number of the latter that
are distinctively emotional are nearly identical among men from
physiological causes which do not affect with the same similarity
the processes of thought. The large number of corporeal gestures
expressing intellectual operations require and admit of more variety
and conventionality. Thus the features and the body among all mankind
act almost uniformly in exhibiting fear, grief, surprise, and shame,
but all objective conceptions are varied and variously portrayed. Even
such simple indications as those for "no" and "yes" appear in several
differing motions. While, therefore, the terms sign language and
gesture speech necessarily include and suppose facial expression when
emotions are in question, they refer more particularly to corporeal
motions and attitudes. For this reason much of the valuable
contribution of DARWIN in his _Expression of the Emotions in Man and
Animals_ is not directly applicable to sign language. His analysis
of emotional gestures into those explained on the principles of
serviceable associated habits, of antithesis, and of the constitution
of the nervous system, should, nevertheless, always be remembered.
Even if it does not strictly embrace the class of gestures which
form the subject of this paper, and which often have an immediate
pantomimic origin, the earliest gestures were doubtless instinctive
and generally emotional, preceding pictorial, metaphoric, and, still
subsequent, conventional gestures even, as, according to DARWIN's
cogent reasoning, they preceded articulate speech.

While the distinction above made between the realm of facial play and
that of motions of the body, especially those of the arms and hands,
is sufficiently correct for use in discussion, it must be admitted
that the features do express intellect as well as emotion. The
well-known saying of Charles Lamb that "jokes came in with the
candles" is in point, but the most remarkable example of conveying
detailed information without the use of sounds, hands, or arms,
is given by the late President T.H. Gallaudet, the distinguished
instructor of deaf-mutes, which, to be intelligible, requires to be
quoted at length:

"One day, our distinguished and lamented historical painter, Col. John
Trumbull, was in my school-room during the hours of instruction, and,
on my alluding to the tact which the pupil referred to had of reading
my face, he expressed a wish to see it tried. I requested him to
select any event in Greek, Roman, English, or American history of a
scenic character, which would make a striking picture on canvas, and
said I would endeavor to communicate it to the lad. 'Tell him,' said
he, 'that Brutus (Lucius Junius) condemned his two sons to death for
resisting his authority and violating his orders.'

"I folded my arms in front of me, and kept them in that position,
to preclude the possibility of making any signs or gestures, or of
spelling any words on my fingers, and proceeded, as best I could, by
the expression of my countenance, and a few motions of my head and
attitudes of the body, to convey the picture in my own mind to the
mind of my pupil.

"It ought to be stated that he was already acquainted with the fact,
being familiar with the leading events in Roman history. But when I
began, he knew not from what portion of history, sacred or profane,
ancient or modern, the fact was selected. From this wide range,
my delineation on the one hand and his ingenuity on the other had
to bring it within the division of Roman history, and, still more
minutely, to the particular individual and transaction designated by
Colonel Trumbull. In carrying on the process, I made no use whatever
of any arbitrary, conventional look, motion, or attitude, before
settled between us, by which to let him understand what I wished to
communicate, with the exception of a single one, if, indeed, it ought
to be considered such.

"The usual sign, at that time, among the teachers and pupils, for
a Roman, was portraying an aquiline nose by placing the forefinger,
crooked, in front of the nose. As I was prevented from using my finger
in this way, and having considerable command over the muscles of my
face, I endeavored to give my nose as much of the aquiline form as
possible, and succeeded well enough for my purpose....

"The outlines of the process were the following:

"A stretching and stretching gaze eastward, with an undulating motion
of the head, as if looking across and beyond the Atlantic Ocean,
to denote that the event happened, not on the western, but eastern
continent. This was making a little progress, as it took the subject
out of the range of American history.

"A turning of the eyes upward and backward, with frequently-repeated
motions of the head backward, as if looking a great way back in past
time, to denote that the event was one of ancient date.

"The aquiline shape of the nose, already referred to, indicating that
a Roman was the person concerned. It was, of course, an old Roman.

"Portraying, as well as I could, by my countenance, attitude, and
manner an individual high in authority, and commanding others, as if
he expected to be obeyed.

"Looking and acting as if I were giving out a specific order to many
persons, and threatening punishment on those who should resist my
authority, even the punishment of death.

"Here was a pause in the progress of events, which I denoted by
sleeping as it were during the night and awakening in the morning, and
doing this several times, to signify that several days had elapsed.

"Looking with deep interest and surprise, as if at a single person
brought and standing before me, with an expression of countenance
indicating that he had violated the order which I had given, and that
I knew it. Then looking in the same way at another person near him as
also guilty. Two offending persons were thus denoted.

"Exhibiting serious deliberation, then hesitation, accompanied with
strong conflicting emotions, producing perturbation, as if I knew not
how to feel or what to do.

"Looking first at one of the persons before me, and then at the other,
and then at both together, _as a father would look_, indicating his
distressful parental feelings under such afflicting circumstances.

"Composing my feelings, showing that a change was coming over me, and
exhibiting towards the imaginary persons before me the decided look of
the inflexible commander, who was determined and ready to order them
away to execution. Looking and acting as if the tender and forgiving
feelings of _the father_ had again got the ascendency, and as if I was
about to relent and pardon them.

"These alternating states of mind I portrayed several times, to make
my representations the more graphic and impressive.

"At length the father yields, and the stern principle of justice, as
expressed in my countenance and manners, prevails. My look and action
denote the passing of the sentence of death on the offenders, and the
ordering them away to execution.

* * * * *

"He quickly turned round to his slate and wrote a correct and complete
account of this story of Brutus and his two sons."

* * * * *

While it appears that the expressions of the features are not confined
to the emotions or to distinguishing synonyms, it must be remembered
that the meaning of the same motion of hands, arms, and fingers is
often modified, individualized, or accentuated by associated facial
changes and postures of the body not essential to the sign, which
emotional changes and postures are at once the most difficult to
describe and the most interesting when intelligently reported, not
only because they infuse life into the skeleton sign, but because they
may belong to the class of innate expressions.

THE ORIGIN OF SIGN LANGUAGE.

In observing the maxim that nothing can be thoroughly understood
unless its beginning is known, it becomes necessary to examine into
the origin of sign language through its connection with that of oral
speech. In this examination it is essential to be free from the vague
popular impression that some oral language, of the general character
of that now used among mankind, is "natural" to mankind. It will be
admitted on reflection that all oral languages were at some past time
far less serviceable to those using them than they are now, and as
each particular language has been thoroughly studied it has become
evident that it grew out of some other and less advanced form. In
the investigation of these old forms it has been so difficult to
ascertain how any of them first became a useful instrument of
inter-communication that many conflicting theories on this subject
have been advocated.

Oral language consists of variations and mutations of vocal sounds
produced as signs of thought and emotion. But it is not enough that
those signs should be available as the vehicle of the producer's own
thoughts. They must be also efficient for the communication of such
thoughts to others. It has been, until of late years, generally held
that thought was not possible without oral language, and that, as man
was supposed to have possessed from the first the power of thought, he
also from the first possessed and used oral language substantially
as at present. That the latter, as a special faculty, formed the
main distinction between man and the brutes has been and still is
the prevailing doctrine. In a lecture delivered before the British
Association in 1878 it was declared that "animal intelligence is
unable to elaborate that class of abstract ideas, the formation of
which depends upon the faculty of speech." If instead of "speech" the
word "utterance" had been used, as including all possible modes of
intelligent communication, the statement might pass without criticism.
But it may be doubted if there is any more necessary connection
between abstract ideas and sounds, the mere signs of thought, that
strike the ear, than there is between the same ideas and signs
addressed only to the eye.

The point most debated for centuries has been, not whether there
was any primitive oral language, but what that language was. Some
literalists have indeed argued from the Mosaic narrative that because
the Creator, by one supernatural act, with the express purpose to
form separate peoples, had divided all tongues into their present
varieties, and could, by another similar exercise of power, obliterate
all but one which should be universal, the fact that he had not
exercised that power showed it not to be his will that any man to
whom a particular speech had been given should hold intercourse with
another miraculously set apart from him by a different speech. By this
reasoning, if the study of a foreign tongue was not impious, it was
at least clear that the primitive language had been taken away as a
disciplinary punishment, as the Paradisiac Eden had been earlier lost,
and that, therefore, the search for it was as fruitless as to attempt
the passage of the flaming sword. More liberal Christians have been
disposed to regard the Babel story as allegorical, if not mythical,
and have considered it to represent the disintegration of tongues
out of one which was primitive. In accordance with the advance of
linguistic science they have successively shifted back the postulated
primitive tongue from Hebrew to Sanscrit, then to Aryan, and now seek
to evoke from the vasty deeps of antiquity the ghosts of other rival
claimants for precedence in dissolution. As, however, the languages of
man are now recognized as extremely numerous, and as the very sounds
of which these several languages are composed are so different that
the speakers of some are unable to distinguish with the ear certain
sounds in others, still less able to reproduce them, the search for
one common parent language is more difficult than was supposed by
mediaeval ignorance.

The discussion is now, however, varied by the suggested possibility
that man at some time may have existed without any oral language. It
is conceded by some writers that mental images or representations can
be formed without any connection with sound, and may at least serve
for thought, though not for expression. It is certain that concepts,
however formed, can be expressed by other means than sound. One mode
of this expression is by gesture, and there is less reason to believe
that gestures commenced as the interpretation of, or substitute for
words than that the latter originated in, and served to translate
gestures. Many arguments have been advanced to prove that gesture
language preceded articulate speech and formed the earliest attempt
at communication, resulting from the interacting subjective and
objective conditions to which primitive man was exposed. Some of the
facts on which deductions have been based, made in accordance with
well-established modes of scientific research from study of the lower
animals, children, idiots, the lower types of mankind, and deaf-mutes,
will be briefly mentioned.

_GESTURES OF THE LOWER ANIMALS._

Emotional expression in the features of man is to be considered in
reference to the fact that the special senses either have their seat
in, or are in close relation to the face, and that so large a number
of nerves pass to it from the brain. The same is true of the lower
animals, so that it would be inferred, as is the case, that the faces
of those animals are also expressive of emotion. There is also noticed
among them an exhibition of emotion by corporeal action. This is the
class of gestures common to them with the earliest made by man, as
above mentioned, and it is reasonable to suppose that those were made
by man at the time when, if ever, he was, like the animals, destitute
of articulate speech. The articulate cries uttered by some animals,
especially some birds, are interesting as connected with the principle
of imitation to which languages in part owe their origin, but in the
cases of forced imitation, the mere acquisition of a vocal trick,
they only serve to illustrate that power of imitation, and are without
significance. Sterne's starling, after his cage had been opened, would
have continued to complain that he could not get out. If the bird had
uttered an instinctive cry of distress when in confinement and a note
of joy on release, there would have been a nearer approach to language
than if it had clearly pronounced many sentences. Such notes and
cries of animals, many of which are connected with reproduction and
nutrition, are well worth more consideration than can now be given,
but regarding them generally it is to be questioned if they are so
expressive as the gestures of the same animals. It is contended that
the bark of a dog is distinguishable into fear, defiance, invitation,
and a note of warning, but it also appears that those notes have been
known only since the animal has been domesticated. The gestures of
the dog are far more readily distinguished than his bark, as in his
preparing for attack, or caressing his master, resenting an injury,
begging for food, or simply soliciting attention. The chief modern
use of his tail appears to be to express his ideas and sensations. But
some recent experiments of Prof. A. GRAHAM BELL, no less eminent from
his work in artificial speech than in telephones, shows that animals
are more physically capable of pronouncing articulate sounds than has
been supposed. He informed the writer that he recently succeeded by
manipulation in causing an English terrier to form a number of the
sounds of our letters, and particularly brought out from it the words
"How are you, Grandmamma?" with distinctness. This tends to prove
that only absence of brain power has kept animals from acquiring true
speech. The remarkable vocal instrument of the parrot could be used in
significance as well as in imitation, if its brain had been developed
beyond the point of expression by gesture, in which latter the bird is
expert.

The gestures of monkeys, whose hands and arms can be used, are nearly
akin to ours. Insects communicate with each other almost entirely by
means of the antennae. Animals in general which, though not deaf, can
not be taught by sound, frequently have been by signs, and probably
all of them understand man's gestures better than his speech. They
exhibit signs to one another with obvious intention, and they also
have often invented them as a means of obtaining their wants from man.

_GESTURES OF YOUNG CHILDREN._

The wishes and emotions of very young children are conveyed in a
small number of sounds, but in a great variety of gestures and facial
expressions. A child's gestures are intelligent long in advance of
speech; although very early and persistent attempts are made to give
it instruction in the latter but none in the former, from the time
when it begins _risu cognoscere matrem_. It learns words only as they
are taught, and learns them through the medium of signs which are not
expressly taught. Long after familiarity with speech, it consults
the gestures and facial expressions of its parents and nurses as
if seeking thus to translate or explain their words. These facts
are important in reference to the biologic law that the order of
development of the individual is the same as that of the species.

Among the instances of gestures common to children throughout the
world is that of protruding the lips, or pouting, when somewhat angry
or sulky. The same gesture is now made by the anthropoid apes and is
found strongly marked in the savage tribes of man. It is noticed by
evolutionists that animals retain during early youth, and subsequently
lose, characters once possessed by their progenitors when adult, and
still retained by distinct species nearly related to them.

The fact is not, however, to be ignored that children invent words as
well as signs with as natural an origin for the one as for the other.
An interesting case was furnished to the writer by Prof. BELL of an
infant boy who used a combination of sounds given as "nyum-nyum,"
an evident onomatope of gustation, to mean "good," and not only in
reference to articles of food relished but as applied to persons of
whom the child was fond, rather in the abstract idea of "niceness"
in general. It is a singular coincidence that a bright young girl,
a friend of the writer, in a letter describing a juvenile feast,
invented the same expression, with nearly the same spelling, as
characteristic of her sensations regarding the delicacies provided.
The Papuans met by Dr. Comrie also called "eating" _nam-nam_. But the
evidence of all such cases of the voluntary use of articulate speech
by young children is qualified by the fact that it has been inherited
from very many generations, if not quite so long as the faculty of
gesture.

_GESTURES IN MENTAL DISORDER._

The insane understand and obey gestures when they have no knowledge
whatever of words. It is also found that semi-idiotic children who
cannot be taught more than the merest rudiments of speech, can receive
a considerable amount of information through signs, and can express
themselves by them. Sufferers from aphasia continue to use appropriate
gestures after their words have become uncontrollable. It is further
noticeable in them that mere ejaculations, or sounds which are only
the result of a state of feeling, instead of a desire to express
thought, are generally articulated with accuracy. Patients who have
been in the habit of swearing preserve their fluency in that division
of their vocabulary.

_UNINSTRUCTED DEAF-MUTES._

The signs made by congenital and uninstructed deaf-mutes to be now
considered are either strictly natural signs, invented by themselves,
or those of a colloquial character used by such mutes where
associated. The accidental or merely suggestive signs peculiar to
families, one member of which happens to be a mute, are too much
affected by the other members of the family to be of certain
value. Those, again, which are taught in institutions have become
conventional and designedly adapted to translation into oral speech,
although founded by the abbe de l'Epee, followed by the abbe Sicard,
in the natural signs first above mentioned.

A great change has doubtless occurred in the estimation of congenital
deaf-mutes since the Justinian Code, which consigned them forever to
legal infancy, as incapable of intelligence, and classed them with the
insane. Yet most modern writers, for instance Archbishop Whately and
Max Mueller, have declared that deaf-mutes could not think until
after having been instructed. It cannot be denied that the deaf-mute
thinks after his instruction either in the ordinary gesture signs or
in the finger alphabet, or more lately in artificial speech. By this
instruction he has become master of a highly-developed language, such
as English or French, which he can read, write, and actually talk,
but that foreign language he has obtained through the medium of signs.
This is a conclusive proof that signs constitute a real language and
one which admits of thought, for no one can learn a foreign language
unless he had some language of his own, whether by descent or
acquisition, by which it could be translated, and such translation
into the new language could not even be commenced unless the mind had
been already in action and intelligently using the original language
for that purpose. In fact the use by deaf-mutes of signs originating
in themselves exhibits a creative action of mind and innate faculty
of expression beyond that of ordinary speakers who acquired language
without conscious effort. The thanks of students, both of philology
and psychology, are due to Prof. SAMUEL PORTER, of the National Deaf
Mute College, for his response to the question, "Is thought possible
without language?" published in the _Princeton Review_ for January,
1880.

With regard to the sounds uttered by deaf-mutes, the same explanation
of heredity may be made as above, regarding the words invented by
young children. Congenital deaf-mutes at first make the same sounds
as hearing children of the same age, and, often being susceptible
to vibrations of the air, are not suspected of being deaf. When that
affliction is ascertained to exist, all oral utterances from the
deaf-mute are habitually repressed by the parents.

_GESTURES OF THE BLIND._

The facial expressions and gestures of the congenitally blind are
worthy of attention. The most interesting and conclusive examples
come from the case of Laura Bridgman, who, being also deaf, could not
possibly have derived them by imitation. When a letter from a beloved
friend was communicated to her by gesture-language, she laughed
and clapped her hands. A roguish expression was given to her face,
concomitant with the emotion, by her holding the lower lip by the
teeth. She blushed, shrugged her shoulders, turned in her elbows, and
raised her eye-brows under the same circumstances as other people.
In amazement, she rounded and protruded the lips, opened them, and
breathed strongly. It is remarkable that she constantly accompanied
her "yes" with the common affirmative nod, and her "no" with our
negative shake of the head, as these gestures are by no means
universal and do not seem clearly connected with emotion. This,
possibly, may be explained by the fact that her ancestors for many
generations had used these gestures. A similar curious instance is
mentioned by Cardinal Wiseman (_Essays_, III, 547, _London_, 1853) of
an Italian blind man, the appearance of whose eyes indicated that he
had never enjoyed sight, and who yet made the same elaborate gestures
made by the people with whom he lived, but which had been used by them
immemorially, as correctly as if he had learned them by observation.

_LOSS OF SPEECH BY ISOLATION._

When human beings have been long in solitary confinement, been
abandoned, or otherwise have become isolated from their fellows, they
have lost speech either partially or entirely, and required to have
it renewed through gestures. There are also several recorded cases of
children, born with all their faculties, who, after having been lost
or abandoned, have been afterwards found to have grown up possessed
of acute hearing, but without anything like human speech. One of these
was Peter, "the Wild Boy," who was found in the woods of Hanover in
1726, and taken to England, where vain attempts were made to teach him
language, though he lived to the age of seventy. Another was a boy of
twelve, found in the forest of Aveyron, in France, about the beginning
of this century, who was destitute of speech, and all efforts to teach
him failed. Some of these cases are to be considered in connection
with the general law of evolution, that in degeneration the last
and highest acquirements are lost first. When in these the effort
at acquiring or re-acquiring speech has been successful, it has been
through gestures, in the same manner as missionaries, explorers,
and shipwrecked mariners have become acquainted with tongues before
unknown to themselves and sometimes to civilization. All persons in
such circumstances are obliged to proceed by pointing to objects and
making gesticulations, at the same time observing what articulate
sounds were associated with those motions by the persons addressed,
and thus vocabularies and lists of phrases were formed.

_LOW TRIBES OF MAN._

Apart from the establishment of a systematic language of signs under
special circumstances which have occasioned its development, the
gestures of the lower tribes of men may be generally classed under the
emotional or instinctive division, which can be correlated with those
of the lower animals. This may be illustrated by the modes adopted to
show friendship in salutation, taking the place of our shaking hands.
Some Pacific Islanders used to show their joy at meeting friends by
sniffing at them, after the style of well-disposed dogs. The Fuegians
pat and slap each other, and some Polynesians stroke their own faces
with the hand or foot of the friend. The practice of rubbing or
pressing noses is very common. It has been noticed in the Lapland
Alps, often in Africa, and in Australia the tips of the noses are
pressed a long time, accompanied with grunts of satisfaction. Patting
and stroking different parts of the body are still more frequent, and
prevailed among the North American Indians, though with the latter
the most common expression was hugging. In general, the civilities
exchanged are similar to those of many animals.

_GESTURES AS AN OCCASIONAL RESOURCE._

Persons of limited vocabulary, whether foreigners to the tongue
employed or native, but not accomplished in its use, even in the midst
of a civilization where gestures are deprecated, when at fault for
words resort instinctively to physical motions that are not wild nor
meaningless, but picturesque and significant, though perhaps made
by the gesturer for the first time. An uneducated laborer, if
good-natured enough to be really desirous of responding to a request
for information, when he has exhausted his scanty stock of words will
eke them out by original gestures. While fully admitting the advice to
Coriolanus--

Action is eloquence, and the eyes of the ignorant
More learned than the ears--

it may be paraphrased to read that the hands of the ignorant are
more learned than their tongues. A stammerer, too, works his arms and
features as if determined to get his thoughts out, in a manner not
only suggestive of the physical struggle, but of the use of gestures
as a hereditary expedient.

_GESTURES OF FLUENT TALKERS._

The same is true of the most fluent talkers on occasions when the
exact vocal formula desired does not at once suggest itself, or is
unsatisfactory without assistance from the physical machinery not
embraced in the oral apparatus. The command of a copious vocabulary
common to both speaker and hearer undoubtedly tends to a phlegmatic
delivery and disdain of subsidiary aid. An excited speaker will,
however, generally make a free use of his hands without regard to
any effect of that use upon auditors. Even among the gesture-hating
English, when they are aroused from torpidity of manner, the hands are
involuntarily clapped in approbation, rubbed with delight, wrung in
distress, raised in astonishment, and waved in triumph. The fingers
are snapped for contempt, the forefinger is vibrated to reprove or
threaten, and the fist shaken in defiance. The brow is contracted with
displeasure, and the eyes winked to show connivance. The shoulders
are shrugged to express disbelief or repugnance, the eyebrows
elevated with surprise, the lips bitten in vexation and thrust out in
sullenness or displeasure, while a higher degree of anger is shown
by a stamp of the foot. Quintilian, regarding the subject, however,
not as involuntary exhibition of feeling and intellect, but for
illustration and enforcement, becomes eloquent on the variety of
motions of which the hands alone are capable, as follows:

"The action of the other parts of the body assists the speaker, but
the hands (I could almost say) speak themselves. By them do we
not demand, promise, call, dismiss, threaten, supplicate, express
abhorrence and terror, question and deny? Do we not by them express
joy and sorrow, doubt, confession, repentance, measure, quantity,
number, and time? Do they not also encourage, supplicate, restrain,
convict, admire, respect? and in pointing out places and persons do
they not discharge the office of adverbs and of pronouns?"

Voss adopts almost the words of Quintilian, "_Manus non modo loquentem
adjuvant, sed ipsae pene loqui videntur_," while Cresollius calls the
hand "the minister of reason and wisdom ... without it there is no
eloquence."

_INVOLUNTARY RESPONSE TO GESTURES._

Further evidence of the unconscious survival of gesture language is
afforded by the ready and involuntary response made in signs to signs
when a man with the speech and habits of civilization is brought into
close contact with Indians or deaf-mutes. Without having ever before
seen or made one of their signs, he will soon not only catch the
meaning of theirs, but produce his own, which they will likewise
comprehend, the power seemingly remaining latent in him until called
forth by necessity.

_NATURAL PANTOMIME._

In the earliest part of man's history the subjects of his discourse
must have been almost wholly sensuous, and therefore readily expressed
in pantomime. Not only was pantomime sufficient for all the actual
needs of his existence, but it is not easy to imagine how he could
have used language such as is now known to us. If the best English
dictionary and grammar had been miraculously furnished to him,
together with the art of reading with proper pronunciation, the gift
would have been valueless, because the ideas expressed by the words
had not yet been formed.

That the early concepts were of a direct and material character is
shown by what has been ascertained of the roots of language, and there
does not appear to be much difficulty in expressing by other than
vocal instrumentality all that could have been expressed by those
roots. Even now, with our vastly increased belongings of external
life, avocations, and habits, nearly all that is absolutely necessary
for our physical needs can be expressed in pantomime. Far beyond the
mere signs for eating, drinking, sleeping, and the like, any one will
understand a skillful representation in signs of a tailor, shoemaker,
blacksmith, weaver, sailor, farmer, or doctor. So of washing,
dressing, shaving, walking, driving, writing, reading, churning,
milking, boiling, roasting or frying, making bread or preparing
coffee, shooting, fishing, rowing, sailing, sawing, planing, boring,
and, in short, an endless list.

Max Mueller properly calls touch, scent, and taste the palaioteric,
and sight and hearing the neoteric senses, the latter of which
often require to be verified by the former. Touch is the lowest in
specialization and development, and is considered to be the oldest of
the senses, the others indeed being held by some writers to be only
its modifications. Scent, of essential importance to many animals, has
with man almost ceased to be of any, except in connection with taste,
which he has developed to a high degree. Whether or not sight preceded
hearing in order of development, it is difficult, in conjecturing the
first attempts of man or his hypothetical ancestor at the expression
either of percepts or concepts, to connect vocal sounds with any
large number of objects, but it is readily conceivable that the
characteristics of their forms and movements should have been
suggested to the eye--fully exercised before the tongue--so soon
as the arms and fingers became free for the requisite simulation
or portrayal. There is little distinction between pantomime and a
developed sign language, in which thought is transmitted rapidly and
certainly from hand to eye as it is in oral speech from lips to
ear; the former is, however, the parent of the latter, which is more
abbreviated and less obvious. Pantomime acts movements, reproduces
forms and positions, presents pictures, and manifests emotions with
greater realization than any other mode of utterance. It may readily
be supposed that a troglodyte man would desire to communicate the
finding of a cave in the vicinity of a pure pool, circled with soft
grass, and shaded by trees bearing edible fruit. No sound of nature is
connected with any of those objects, but the position and size of the
cave, its distance and direction, the water, its quality, and amount,
the verdant circling carpet, and the kind and height of the trees
could have been made known by pantomime in the days of the mammoth,
if articulate speech had not then been established, as Indians or
deaf-mutes now communicate similar information by the same agency.

The proof of this fact, as regards deaf-mutes, will hardly be
demanded, as their expressive pantomime has been so often witnessed.
That of the North American Indians, as distinct from the signs which
are generally its abbreviations, has been frequently described in
general terms, but it may be interesting to present two instances from
remote localities.

A Maricopa Indian, in the present limits of Arizona, was offered an
advantageous trade for his horse, whereupon he stretched himself on
his horse's neck, caressed it tenderly, at the same time shutting his
eyes, meaning thereby that no offer could tempt him to part with his
charger.

An A-tco-ma-wi or Pit River Indian, in Northeastern California, to
explain the cause of his cheeks and forehead being covered with tar,
represented a man falling, and, despite his efforts to save him,
trembling, growing pale (pointing from his face to that of a white
man), and sinking to sleep, his spirit winging its way to the skies,
which he indicated by imitating with his hands the flight of a bird
upwards, his body sleeping still upon the river bank, to which he
pointed. The tar upon his face was thus shown to be his dress of
mourning for a friend who had fallen and died.

Several descriptions of pure pantomime, intermixed with the more
conventionalized signs, will be found in the present paper. In
especial, reference is made to the Address of Kin Ch[=e]-[)e]ss,
Natci's Narrative, the Dialogue between Alaskan Indians, and
Na-wa-gi-jig's Story.

SOME THEORIES UPON PRIMITIVE LANGUAGE.

Cresollius, writing in 1620, was strongly in favor of giving
precedence to gesture. He says, "Man, full of wisdom and divinity,
could have appeared nothing superior to a naked trunk or block had he
not been adorned with the hand as the interpreter and messenger of
his thoughts." He quotes with approval the brother of St. Basil in
declaring that had men been formed without hands they would never have
been endowed with an articulate voice, and concludes: "Since, then,
nature has furnished us with two instruments for the purpose of
bringing into light and expressing the silent affections of the
mind, language and the hand, it has been the opinion of learned and
intelligent men that the former would be maimed and nearly useless
without the latter; whereas the hand, without the aid of language, has
produced many and wonderful effects."

Rabelais, who incorporated into his satirical work much true learning
and philosophy, makes his hero announce the following opinion:

"Nothing less, quoth Pantagruel [Book iii, ch. xix], do I believe than
that it is a mere abusing of our understandings to give credit to
the words of those who say that there is any such thing as a natural
language. All speeches have had their primary origin from the
arbitrary institutions, accords, and agreements of nations in their
respective condescendments to what should be noted and betokened
by them. An articulate voice, according to the dialecticians, hath
naturally no signification at all; for that the sense and meaning
thereof did totally depend upon the good will and pleasure of the
first deviser and imposer of it."

Max Mueller, following Professor Heyse, of Berlin, published an
ingenious theory of primitive speech, to the effect that man had a
creative faculty giving to each conception, as it thrilled through his
brain for the first time, a special phonetic expression, which faculty
became extinct when its necessity ceased. This theory, which makes
each radical of language to be a phonetic type rung out from the
organism of the first man or men when struck by an idea, has been
happily named the "ding-dong" theory. It has been abandoned mainly
through the destructive criticisms of Prof. W.D. WHITNEY, of Yale
College. One lucid explanation by the latter should be specially
noted: "A word is a combination of sounds which by a series of
historical reasons has come to be accepted and understood in a certain
community as the sign of a certain idea. As long as they so accept
and understand it, it has existence; when everyone ceases to use and
understand it, it ceases to exist."

Several authors, among them Kaltschmidt, contend that there was
but one primitive language, which was purely onomatopoeic, that
is, imitative of natural sounds. This has been stigmatized as the
"bow-wow" theory, but its advocates might derive an argument from the
epithet itself, as not only our children, but the natives of Papua,
call the dog a "bow-wow." They have, however, gone too far in
attempting to trace back words in their shape as now existing to any
natural sounds instead of confining that work to the roots from which
the words have sprung.

Another attempt has been made, represented by Professor Noire, to
account for language by means of interjectional cries. This Max
Mueller revengefully styled the "pooh-pooh" theory. In it is included
the rhythmical sounds which a body of men make seemingly by a common
impulse when engaged in a common work, such as the cries of sailors
when hauling on a rope or pulling an oar, or the yell of savages in an
attack. It also derives an argument from the impulse of life by which
the child shouts and the bird sings. There are, however, very few
either words or roots of words which can be proved to have that
derivation.

Professor SAYCE, in his late work, _Introduction to the Science of
Language, London_, 1880, gives the origin of language in gestures,
in onomatopoeia, and to a limited extent in interjectional cries.
He concludes it to be the ordinary theory of modern comparative
philologists that all languages are traced back to a certain number
of abstract roots, each of which was a sort of sentence in embryo,
and while he does not admit this as usually presented, he believes
that there was a time in the history of speech, when the articulate
or semi-articulate sounds uttered by primitive men were made the
significant representations of thought by the gestures with which
they were accompanied. This statement is specially gratifying to the
present writer as he had advanced much the same views in his first
publication on the subject in the following paragraph, now reproduced
with greater confidence:

"From their own failures and discordancies, linguistic scholars have
recently decided that both the 'bow-wow' and the 'ding-dong' theories
are unsatisfactory; that the search for imitative, onomatopoeic, and
directly expressive sounds to explain the origin of human speech has
been too exclusive, and that many primordial roots of language have
been founded in the involuntary sounds accompanying certain actions.
As, however, the action was the essential, and the consequent
or concomitant sound the accident, it would be expected that a
representation or feigned reproduction of the action would have been
used to express the idea before the sound associated with that
action could have been separated from it. The visual onomatopoeia of
gestures, which even yet have been subjected to but slight artificial
corruption, would therefore serve as a key to the audible. It is also
contended that in the pristine days, when the sounds of the only words
yet formed had close connection with objects and the ideas directly
derived from them, signs were as much more copious for communication
than speech, as the sight embraces more and more distinct
characteristics of objects than does the sense of hearing."

_CONCLUSIONS._

The preponderance of authority is in favor of the view that man, when
in the possession of all his faculties, did not choose between voice
and gesture, both being originally instinctive, as they both are now,
and never, with those faculties, was in a state where the one was used
to the absolute exclusion of the other. The long neglected work of
Dalgarno, published in 1661, is now admitted to show wisdom when he
says: "_non minus naturale fit homini communicare in_ Figuris _quam_
Sonis: _quorum utrumque dico homini_ naturale." With the voice man
at first imitated the few sounds of nature, while with gesture he
exhibited actions, motions, positions, forms, dimensions, directions,
and distances, and their derivatives. It would appear from this
unequal division of capacity that oral speech remained rudimentary
long after gesture had become an art. With the concession of all
purely imitative sounds and of the spontaneous action of the vocal
organs under excitement, it is still true that the connection between
ideas and words generally depended upon a compact between the
speaker and hearer which presupposes the existence of a prior mode of
communication. That was probably by gesture, which, in the apposite
phrase of Professor SAYCE, "like the rope-bridges of the Himalayas or
the Andes, formed the first rude means of communication between man
and man." At the very least it may be gladly accepted provisionally as
a clue leading out of the labyrinth of philologic confusion.

For the purpose of the present paper there is, however, no need of an
absolute decision upon the priority between communication of ideas by
bodily motion and by vocal articulation. It is enough to admit that
the connection between them was so early and intimate that gestures,
in the wide sense indicated of presenting ideas under physical forms,
had a direct formative effect upon many words; that they exhibit the
earliest condition of the human mind; are traced from the remotest
antiquity among all peoples possessing records; are generally
prevalent in the savage stage of social evolution; survive agreeably
in the scenic pantomime, and still adhere to the ordinary speech of
civilized man by motions of the face, hands, head, and body, often
involuntary, often purposely in illustration or for emphasis.

It may be unnecessary to explain that none of the signs to be
described, even those of present world-wide prevalence, are presented
as precisely those of primitive man. Signs as well as words, animals,
and plants have had their growth, development, and change, their
births and deaths, and their struggle for existence with survival of
the fittest. It is, however, thought probable from reasons hereinafter
mentioned that their radicals can be ascertained with more precision
than those of words.

HISTORY OF GESTURE LANGUAGE.

There is ample evidence of record, besides that derived from other
sources, that the systematic use of gesture speech was of great
antiquity. Livy so declares, and Quintilian specifies that the "_lex
gestus ... ab illis temporibus heroicis orta est_." Plato classed its
practice among civil virtues, and Chrysippus gave it place among the
proper education of freemen. Athenaeus tells that gestures were even
reduced to distinct classification with appropriate terminology. The
class suited to comedy was called Cordax, that to tragedy Eumelia, and
that for satire Sicinnis, from the inventor Sicinnus. Bathyllus from
these formed a fourth class, adapted to pantomime. This system appears
to have been particularly applicable to theatrical performances.
Quintilian, later, gave most elaborate rules for gestures in oratory,
which are specially noticeable from the importance attached to the
manner of disposing the fingers. He attributed to each particular
disposition a significance or suitableness which are not now obvious.
Some of them are retained by modern orators, but without the same, or
indeed any, intentional meaning, and others are wholly disused.

[Illustration: Fig. 61.]

The value of these digital arrangements is, however, shown by their
use among the modern Italians, to whom they have directly descended.
From many illustrations of this fact the following is selected. Fig.
61 is copied from Austin's _Chironomia_ as his graphic execution of
the gesture described by Quintilian: "The fore finger of the right
hand joining the middle of its nail to the extremity of its own thumb,
and moderately extending the rest of the fingers, is graceful in
_approving_." Fig. 62 is taken from De Jorio's plates and descriptions
of the gestures among modern Neapolitans, with the same idea of
approbation--"good." Both of these may be compared with Fig. 63, a
common sign among the North American Indians to express affirmation
and approbation. With the knowledge of these details it is possible to
believe the story of Macrobius that Cicero used to vie with Roscius,
the celebrated actor, as to which of them could express a sentiment
in the greater variety of ways, the one by gesture and the other by
speech, with the apparent result of victory to the actor who was so
satisfied with the superiority of his art that he wrote a book on the
subject.

[Illustration: Fig. 62.]

Gestures were treated of with still more distinction as connected
with pantomimic dances and representations. Aeschylus appears to
have brought theatrical gesture to a high degree of perfection, but
Telestes, a dancer employed by him, introduced the dumb show, a dance
without marked dancing steps, and subordinated to motions of the
hands, arms, and body, which is dramatic pantomime. He was so great
an artist, says Athenaeus, that when he represented the _Seven before
Thebes_ he rendered every circumstance manifest by his gestures alone.
From Greece, or rather from Egypt, the art was brought to Rome, and
in the reign of Augustus was the great delight of that Emperor and his
friend Maecenas. Bathyllus, of Alexandria, was the first to introduce
it to the Roman public, but he had a dangerous rival in Pylades. The
latter was magnificent, pathetic, and affecting, while Bathyllus
was gay and sportive. All Rome was split into factions about their
respective merits. Athenaeus speaks of a distinguished performer of his
own time (he died A.D. 194) named Memphis, whom he calls the "dancing
philosopher," because he showed what the Pythagorean philosophy could
do by exhibiting in silence everything with stronger evidence than
they could who professed to teach the arts of language. In the
reign of Nero, a celebrated pantomimist who had heard that the cynic
philosopher Demetrius spoke of the art with contempt, prevailed upon
him to witness his performance, with the result that the cynic, more
and more astonished, at last cried out aloud, "Man, I not only see,
but I hear what you do, for to me you appear to speak with your
hands!"

[Illustration: Fig. 63.]

Lucian, who narrates this in his work _De Saltatione_, gives another
tribute to the talent of, perhaps, the same performer. A barbarian
prince of Pontus (the story is told elsewhere of Tyridates, King of
Armenia), having come to Rome to do homage to the Emperor Nero, and
been taken to see the pantomimes, was asked on his departure by
the Emperor what present he would have as a mark of his favor. The
barbarian begged that he might have the principal pantomimist, and
upon being asked why he made such an odd request, replied that he had
many neighbors who spoke such various and discordant languages that he
found it difficult to obtain any interpreter who could understand
them or explain his commands; but if he had the dancer he could by his
assistance easily make himself intelligible to all.

While the general effect of these pantomimes is often mentioned, there
remain but few detailed descriptions of them. Apuleius, however,
in the tenth book of his _Metamorphosis_ or "Golden Ass," gives
sufficient details of the performance of the Judgment of Paris to
show that it strongly resembled the best form of ballet opera known
in modern times. These exhibitions were so greatly in favor that,
according to Ammianus Marcellinus, there were in Rome in the year 190
six thousand persons devoted to the art, and that when a famine raged
they were all kept in the city, though besides all the strangers all
the philosophers were forced to leave. Their popularity continued
until the sixth century, and it is evident from a decree of
Charlemagne that they were not lost, or at least, had been revived in
his time. Those of us who have enjoyed the performance of the original
Ravel troupe will admit that the art still survives, though not with
the magnificence or perfection, especially with reference to serious
subjects, which it exhibited in the age of imperial Rome.

Early and prominent among the post-classic works upon gesture is that
of the venerable Bede (who flourished A.D. 672-735) _De Loquela per
Gestum Digitorum, sive de Indigitatione_. So much discussion had
indeed been carried on in reference to the use of signs for the
desideratum of a universal mode of communication, which also was
designed to be occult and mystic, that Rabelais, in the beginning of
the sixteenth century, who, however satirical, never spent his force
upon matters of little importance, devotes much attention to it. He
makes his English philosopher, Thaumast "The Wonderful" declare, "I
will dispute by signs only, without speaking, for the matters are so
abstruse, hard, and arduous, that words proceeding from the mouth of
man will never be sufficient for unfolding of them to my liking."

The earliest contributions of practical value connected with the
subject were made by George Dalgarno, of Aberdeen, in two works, one
published in London, 1661, entitled _Ars Signorum, vulgo character
universalis et lingua philosophica_, and the other printed at Oxford,
1680, entitled, _Didascalocophus, or the Deaf and Dumb Man's
Tutor_. He spent his life in obscurity, and his works, though he was
incidentally mentioned by Leibnitz under the name of "M. Dalgarus,"
passed into oblivion. Yet he undoubtedly was the precursor of Bishop
Wilkins in his _Essay toward a Real Character and a Philosophical
Language_, published in London, 1668, though indeed the first idea was
far older, it having been, as reported by Piso, the wish of Galen that
some way might be found out to represent things by such peculiar signs
and names as should express their natures. Dalgarno's ideas respecting
the education of the dumb were also of the highest value, and though
they were too refined and enlightened to be appreciated at the period
when he wrote, they probably were used by Dr. Wallis if not by Sicard.
Some of his thoughts should be quoted: "As I think the eye to be as
docile as the ear; so neither see I any reason but the hand might be
made as tractable an organ as the tongue; and as soon brought to form,
if not fair, at least legible characters, as the tongue to imitate
and echo back articulate sounds." A paragraph prophetic of the late
success in educating blind deaf-mutes is as follows: "The soul can
exert her powers by the ministry of any of the senses: and, therefore,
when she is deprived of her principal secretaries, the eye and the
ear, then she must be contented with the service of her lackeys and
scullions, the other senses; which are no less true and faithful
to their mistress than the eye and the ear; but not so quick for
dispatch."

In his division of the modes of "expressing the inward emotions by
outward and sensible signs" he relegates to physiology cases "when
the internal passions are expressed by such external signs as have a
natural connection, by way of cause and effect, with the passion
they discover, as laughing, weeping, frowning, &c., and this way of
interpretation being common to the brute with man belongs to natural
philosophy. And because this goes not far enough to serve the rational
soul, therefore, man has invented Sematology." This he divides into
Pneumatology, interpretation by sounds conveyed through the ear;
Schematology, by figures to the eye, and Haptology, by mutual
contact, skin to skin. Schematology is itself divided into Typology or
Grammatology, and Cheirology or Dactylology. The latter embraces
"the transient motions of the fingers, which of all other ways of
interpretation comes nearest to that of the tongue."

As a phase in the practice of gestures in lieu of speech must be
mentioned the code of the Cistercian monks, who were vowed to silence
except in religious exercises. That they might literally observe their
vows they were obliged to invent a system of communication by signs, a
list of which is given by Leibnitz, but does not show much ingenuity.

A curious description of the speech of the early inhabitants of
the world, given by Swedenborg in his _Arcana Coelestia_, published
1749-1756, may be compared with the present exhibitions of deaf-mutes
in institutions for their instruction. He says it was not articulate
like the vocal speech of our time, but was tacit, being produced not
by external respiration, but by internal. They were able to express
their meaning by slight motions of the lips and corresponding changes
of the face.

[Illustration: Fig. 64.--Group from an ancient Greek vase.]

Austin's comprehensive work, _Chironomia, or a Treatise on Rhetorical
Delivery, London_, 1806, is a repertory of information for all writers
on gesture, who have not always given credit to it, as well as on all
branches of oratory. This has been freely used by the present writer,
as has also the volume by the canon Andrea de Jorio, _La Mimica degli
Antichi investigata nel Gestire Napoletano, Napoli_, 1832. The canon's
chief object was to interpret the gestures of the ancients as shown
in their works of art and described in their writings, by the modern
gesticulations of the Neapolitans, and he has proved that the general
system of gesture once prevailing in ancient Italy is substantially
the same as now observed. With an understanding of the existing
language of gesture the scenes on the most ancient Greek vases
and reliefs obtain a new and interesting significance and form a
connecting link between the present and prehistoric times. Two of
De Jorio's plates are here reproduced, Figs. 64 and 67, with such
explanation and further illustration as is required for the present
subject.

The spirited figures upon the ancient vase, Fig. 64, are red upon a
black ground and are described in the published account in French of
the collection of Sir John Coghill, Bart., of which the following is a
free translation:

Dionysos or Bacchus is represented with a strong beard, his head girt
with the credemnon, clothed in a long folded tunic, above which is an
ample cloak, and holding a thyrsus. Under the form of a satyr, Comus,
or the genius of the table, plays on the double flute and tries to
excite to the dance two nymphs, the companions of Bacchus--Galene,
Tranquility, and Eudia, Serenity. The first of them is dressed in
a tunic, above which is a fawn skin, holding a tympanum or classic
drum on which she is about to strike, while her companion marks the
time by a snapping of the fingers, which custom the author of the
catalogue wisely states is still kept up in Italy in the dance of the
tarantella. The composition is said to express allegorically that pure
and serene pleasures are benefits derived from the god of wine.

[Illustration: Fig. 65.]

[Illustration: Fig. 66.]

This is a fair example of the critical acumen of art-commentators.
The gestures of the two nymphs are interesting, but on very slight
examination it appears that those of Galene have nothing to do with
beat of drum, nor have those of Eudia any connection with music,
though it is not so clear what is the true subject under discussion.
Aided, however, by the light of the modern sign language of Naples,
there seems to be by no means serenity prevailing, but a quarrel
between the ladies, on a special subject which is not necessarily
pure. The nymph at the reader's left fixes her eyes upon her companion
with her index in the same direction, clearly indicating, _thou._ That
the address is reproachful is shown from her countenance, but with
greater certainty from her attitude and the corresponding one of her
companion, who raises both her hands in surprise accompanied with
negation. The latter is expressed by the right hand raised toward
the shoulder, with the palm opposed to the person to whom response is
made. This is the rejection of the idea presented, and is expressed by
some of our Indians, as shown in Fig. 65. A sign of the Dakota tribe
of Indians with the same signification is given in Fig. 270, page 441,
_infra_. At the same time the upper part of the nymph's body is drawn
backward as far as the preservation of equilibrium permits. So a
reproach or accusation is made on the one part, and denied, whether
truthfully or not, on the other. Its subject also may be ascertained.
The left hand of Eudia is not mute; it is held towards her rival with
the balls of the index and thumb united, the modern Neapolitan sign
for _love_, which is drawn more clearly in Fig. 66. It is called the
kissing of the thumb and finger, and there is ample authority to show
that among the ancient classics it was a sign of marriage. St. Jerome,
quoted by Vincenzo Requena, says: "_Nam et ipsa digitorum conjunctio,
et quasi molli osculo se complectans et foederans, maritum pingit et
conjugem_;" and Apuleius clearly alludes to the same gesture as used
in the adoration of Venus, by the words "_primore digito in erectum
pollicem residente_." The gesture is one of the few out of the
large number described in various parts of Rabelais' great work, the
significance of which is explained. It is made by Naz-de-cabre or
Goat's Nose (_Pantagruel_, Book III, Ch. XX), who lifted up into the
air his left hand, the whole fingers whereof he retained fistways
closed together, except the thumb and the forefinger, whose nails
he softly joined and coupled to one another. "I understand, quoth
Pantagruel, what he meaneth by that sign. It denotes marriage." The
quarrel is thus established to be about love; and the fluting satyr
seated between the two nymphs, behind whose back the accusation is
furtively made by the jealous one, may well be the object concerning
whom jealousy is manifested. Eudia therefore, instead of "serenely"
marking time for a "tranquil" tympanist, appears to be crying,
"Galene! you bad thing! you are having, or trying to have, an affair
with my Comus!"--an accusation which this writer verily believes to
have been just. The lady's attitude in affectation of surprised denial
is not that of injured innocence.

* * * * *

[Illustration: Fig. 67.--Group from a vase in the Homeric Gallery.]

[Illustration: Fig. 68.]

[Illustration: Fig. 69.]

Fig. 67, taken from a vase in the Homeric Gallery, is rich in natural
gestures. Without them, from the costumes and attitudes it is easy
to recognize the protagonist or principal actor in the group, and its
general subject. The warrior goddess Athene stands forth in the midst
of what appears to be a council of war. After the study of modern
gesture speech, the votes of each member of the council, with the
degree of positiveness or interest felt by each, can be ascertained.
Athene in animated motion turns her eyes to the right, and extends
her left arm and hand to the left, with her right hand brandishing a
lance in the same direction, in which her feet show her to be ready to
spring. She is urging the figures on her right to follow her at once
to attempt some dangerous enterprise. Of these the elderly man, who is
calmly seated, holds his right hand flat and reversed, and suspended
slightly above his knee. This probably is the ending of the modern
Neapolitan gesture, Fig. 68, which signifies hesitation, advice to
pause before hasty action, "go slowly," and commences higher with a
gentle wavering movement downward. This can be compared with the sign
of some of our Indians, Fig. 69, for _wait! slowly!_ The female figure
at the left of the group, standing firmly and decidedly, raises her
left hand directed to the goddess with the palm vertical. If this
is supposed to be a stationary gesture it means, "_wait! stop!_" It
may, however, be the commencement of the last mentioned gesture, "_go
slow_."

[Illustration: Fig. 70.]

Both of these members of the council advise delay and express doubt of
the propriety of immediate action.

[Illustration: Fig. 71.]

The sitting warrior on the left of Athene presents his left hand flat
and carried well up. This position, supposed to be stationary, now
means to _ask, inquire_, and it may be that he inquires of the other
veteran what reasons he can produce for his temporizing policy. This
may be collated with the modern Neapolitan sign for _ask_, Fig. 70,
and the common Indian sign for "_tell me!_" Fig. 71. In connection
with this it is also interesting to compare the Australian sign for
interrogation, Fig. 72, and also the Comanche Indian sign for _give
me_, Fig. 301, page 480, _infra_. If, however, the artist had the
intention to represent the flat hand as in motion from below upward,
as is probable from the connection, the meaning is _much, greatly_.
He strongly disapproves the counsel of the opposite side. Our Indians
often express the idea of quantity, _much_, with the same conception
of comparative height, by an upward motion of the extended palm, but
with them the palm is held downward. The last figure to the right,
by the action of his whole body, shows his rejection of the proposed
delay, and his right hand gives the modern sign of combined surprise
and reproof.

[Illustration: Fig. 72.]

It is interesting to note the similarity of the merely emotional
gestures and attitudes of modern Italy with those of the classics. The
Pulcinella, Fig. 73, for instance, drawn from life in the streets of
Naples, has the same pliancy and _abandon_ of the limbs as appears in
the supposed foolish slaves of the Vatican Terence.

[Illustration: Fig. 73.]

In close connection with this branch of the study reference must be
made to the gestures exhibited in the works of Italian art only modern
in comparison with the high antiquity of their predecessors. A good
instance is in the Last Supper of Leonardo da Vinci, painted toward
the close of the fifteenth century, and to the figure of Judas
as there portrayed. The gospel denounces him as a thief, which is
expressed in the painting by the hand extended and slightly curved;
imitative of the pilferer's act in clutching and drawing toward
him furtively the stolen object, and is the same gesture that now
indicates _theft_ in Naples, Fig. 74, and among some of the North
American Indians, Fig. 75. The pictorial propriety of the sign is
preserved by the apparent desire of the traitor to obtain the one
white loaf of bread on the table (the remainder being of coarser
quality) which lies near where his hand is tending. Raffaelle was
equally particular in his exhibition of gesture language, even
unto the minutest detail of the arrangement of the fingers. It is
traditional that he sketched the Madonna's hands for the Spasimo di
Sicilia in eleven different positions before he was satisfied.

[Illustration: Fig. 74.]

No allusion to the bibliography of gesture speech, however slight,
should close without including the works of Mgr. D. De Haerne,
who has, as a member of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives, in
addition to his rank in the Roman Catholic Church, been active in
promoting the cause of education in general, and especially that of
the deaf and dumb. His admirable treatise _The Natural Language of
Signs_ has been translated and is accessible to American readers in
the _American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb_, 1875. In that valuable
serial, conducted by Prof. E.A. FAY, of the National Deaf Mute College
at Washington, and now in its twenty-sixth volume, a large amount of
the current literature on the subject indicated by its title can be
found.

[Illustration: Fig. 75.]

MODERN USE OF GESTURE SPEECH.

Dr. TYLOR says (_Early History of Mankind_, 44): "We cannot lay down
as a rule that gesticulation decreases as civilization advances, and
say, for instance, that a Southern Frenchman, because his talk is
illustrated with gestures as a book with pictures, is less civilized
than a German or Englishman." This is true, and yet it is almost
impossible for persons not accustomed to gestures to observe them
without associating the idea of low culture. Thus in Mr. Darwin's
summing up of those characteristics of the natives of Tierra
del Fuego, which rendered it difficult to believe them to be
fellow-creatures, he classes their "violent gestures" with their
filthy and greasy skins, discordant voices, and hideous faces bedaubed
with paint. This description is quoted by the Duke of Argyle in his
_Unity of Nature_ in approval of those characteristics as evidence, of
the lowest condition of humanity.

Whether or not the power of the visible gesture relative to, and
its influence upon the words of modern oral speech are in inverse
proportion to the general culture, it seems established that they do
not bear that or any constant proportion to the development of the
several languages with which gesture is still more or less associated.
The statement has frequently been made that gesture is yet to some
highly-advanced languages a necessary modifying factor, and that
only when a language has become so artificial as to be completely
expressible in written signs--indeed, has been remodeled through their
long familiar use--can the bodily signs be wholly dispensed with. The
evidence for this statement is now doubted, and it is safer to
affirm that a common use of gesture depends more upon the sociologic
conditions of the speakers than upon the degree of copiousness of
their oral speech.

USE BY OTHER PEOPLES THAN NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS.

The nearest approach to a general rule which it is now proposed to
hazard is that where people speaking precisely the same dialect are
not numerous, and are thrown into constant contact on equal terms with
others of differing dialects and languages, gesture is necessarily
resorted to for converse with the latter, and remains for an
indefinite time as a habit or accomplishment among themselves,
while large bodies enjoying common speech, and either isolated from
foreigners, or, when in contact with them, so dominant as to compel
the learning and adoption of their own tongue, become impassive in its
delivery. The ungesturing English, long insular, and now rulers
when spread over continents, may be compared with the profusely
gesticulating Italians dwelling in a maze of dialects and subject for
centuries either to foreign rule or to the influx of strangers on whom
they depended. So common is the use of gestures in Italy, especially
among the lower and uneducated classes, that utterance without them
seems to be nearly impossible. The driver or boatman will often,
on being addressed, involuntarily drop the reins or oars, at the
risk of a serious accident, to respond with his arms and fingers
in accompaniment of his tongue. Nor is the habit confined to the
uneducated. King Ferdinand returning to Naples after the revolt of
1821, and finding that the boisterous multitude would not allow his
voice to be heard, resorted successfully to a royal address in signs,
giving reproaches, threats, admonitions, pardon, and dismissal, to
the entire satisfaction of the assembled lazzaroni. The medium, though
probably not the precise manner of its employment, recalls Lucan's
account of the quieting of an older tumult--

tumultum
Composuit vultu, dextraque silentia fecit.

This rivalry of Punch would, in London, have occasioned measureless
ridicule and disgust. The difference in what is vaguely styled
temperament does not wholly explain the contrast between the two
peoples, for the performance was creditable both to the readiness of
the King in an emergency and to the aptness of his people, the main
distinction being that in Italy there was in 1821, and still is, a
recognized and cultivated language of signs long disused in Great
Britain. In seeking to account for this it will be remembered that the
Italians have a more direct descent from the people who, as has been
above shown, in classic times so long and lovingly cultivated gesture
as a system. They have also had more generally before their eyes the
artistic relics in which gestures have been preserved.

It is a curious fact that some English writers, notably Addison
(_Spectator_, 407), have contended that it does not suit the genius
of that nation to use gestures even in public speaking, against which
doctrine Austin vigorously remonstrates. He says: "There may possibly
be nations whose livelier feelings incline them more to gesticulation
than is common among us, as there are also countries in which plants
of excellent use to man grow spontaneously; these, by care and
culture, are found to thrive also in colder countries."

It is in general to be remarked that as the number of dialects in any
district decreases so will the gestures, though doubtless there is
also weight in the fact not merely that a language has been reduced to
and modified by writing, but that people who are accustomed generally
to read and write, as are the English and Germans, will after a time
think and talk as they write, and without the accompaniments still
persistent among Hindus, Arabs, and the less literate of European
nations.

The fact that in the comparatively small island of Sicily gesture
language has been maintained until the present time in a perfection
not observed elsewhere in Europe must be considered in connection with
the above remark on England's insularity, and it must also be admitted
that several languages have prevailed in the latter, still leaving
dialects. This apparent similarity of conditions renders the contrast
as regards use of gestures more remarkable, yet there are some reasons
for their persistence in Sicily which apply with greater force than
to Great Britain. The explanation, through mere tradition, is that the
common usage of signs dates from the time of Dionysius, the tyrant of
Syracuse, who prohibited meetings and conversation among his subjects,
under the direst penalties, so that they adopted that expedient to
hold communication. It would be more useful to consider the peculiar
history of the island. The Sicanians being its aborigines it was
colonized by Greeks, who, as the Romans asserted, were still more apt
at gesture than themselves. This colonization was also by separate
bands of adventurers from several different states of Greece, so that
they started with dialects and did not unite in a common or national
organization, the separate cities and their territories being governed
by oligarchies or tyrants frequently at war with each other, until,
in the fifth century B.C., the Carthaginians began to contribute a new
admixture of language and blood, followed by Roman, Vandal, Gothic,
Herulian, Arab, and Norman subjugation. Thus some of the conditions
above suggested have existed in this case, but, whatever the
explanation, the accounts given by travelers of the extent to which
the language of signs has been used even during the present generation
are so marvelous as to deserve quotation. The one selected is from
the pen of Alexandre Dumas, who, it is to be hoped, did not carry his
genius for romance into a professedly sober account of travel:

"In the intervals of the acts of the opera I saw lively conversations
carried on between the orchestra and the boxes. Arami, in particular,
recognized a friend whom he had not seen for three years, and who
related to him, by means of his eyes and his hands, what, to judge by
the eager gestures of my companion, must have been matters of great
interest. The conversation ended, I asked him if I might know without
impropriety what was the intelligence which had seemed to interest
him so deeply. 'O, yes,' he replied, 'that person is one of my good
friends, who has been away from Palermo for three years, and he has
been telling me that he was married at Naples; then traveled with
his wife in Austria and in France; there his wife gave birth to a
daughter, whom he had the misfortune to lose; he arrived by steamboat
yesterday, but his wife had suffered so much from sea-sickness that
she kept her bed, and he came alone to the play.' 'My dear friend,'
said I to Arami, 'if you would have me believe you, you must grant
me a favor.' 'What is it?' said he. 'It is, that you do not leave me
during the evening, so that I may be sure you give no instructions to
your friend, and when we join him, that you ask him to repeat aloud
what he said to you by signs.' 'That I will,' said Arami. The curtain
then rose; the second act of Norma was played; the curtain falling,
and the actors being recalled, as usual, we went to the side-room,
where we met the traveler. 'My dear friend,' said Arami, 'I did not
perfectly comprehend what you wanted to tell me; be so good as to
repeat it.' The traveler repeated the story word for word, and without
varying a syllable from the translation, which Arami had made of his
signs; it was marvelous indeed.

"Six weeks after this, I saw a second example of this faculty of mute
communication. This was at Naples. I was walking with a young man
of Syracuse. We passed by a sentinel. The soldier and my companion
exchanged two or three grimaces, which at another time I should not
even have noticed, but the instances I had before seen led me to give
attention. 'Poor fellow,' sighed my companion. 'What did he say to
you?' I asked. 'Well,' said he, 'I thought that I recognized him as
a Sicilian, and I learned from him, as we passed, from what place he
came; he said he was from Syracuse, and that he knew me well. Then
I asked him how he liked the Neapolitan service; he said he did not
like it at all, and if his officers did not treat him better he should
certainly finish by deserting. I then signified to him that if he ever
should be reduced to that extremity, he might rely upon me, and that
I would aid him all in my power. The poor fellow thanked me with all
his heart, and I have no doubt that one day or other I shall see him
come.' Three days after, I was at the quarters of my Syracusan friend,
when he was told that a man asked to see him who would not give his
name; he went out and left me nearly ten minutes. 'Well,' said he,
on returning, 'just as I said.' 'What?' said I. 'That the poor fellow
would desert.'"

After this there is an excuse for believing the tradition that the
revolt called "the Sicilian Vespers," in 1282, was arranged throughout
the island without the use of a syllable, and even the day and hour
for the massacre of the obnoxious foreigners fixed upon by signs only.
Indeed, the popular story goes so far as to assert that all this was
done by facial expression, without even manual signs.

NEAPOLITAN SIGNS.

It is fortunately possible to produce some illustrations of the modern
Neapolitan sign language traced from the plates of De Jorio, with
translations, somewhat condensed, of his descriptions and remarks.

[Illustration: Fig. 76.--Neapolitan public letter-writer and clients.]

[Illustration: Fig. 77.]

In Fig. 76 an ambulant secretary or public writer is seated at his
little table, on which are the meager tools of his trade. He wears
spectacles in token that he has read and written much, and has one
seat at his side to accommodate his customers. On this is seated a
married woman who asks him to write a letter to her absent husband.
The secretary, not being told what to write about, without surprise,
but somewhat amused, raises his left hand with the ends of the thumb
and finger joined, the other fingers naturally open, a common sign for
_inquiry_. "What shall the letter be about?" The wife, not being ready
of speech, to rid herself of the embarrassment, resorts to the mimic
art, and, without opening her mouth, tells with simple gestures all
that is in her mind. Bringing her right hand to her heart, with a
corresponding glance of the eyes she shows that the theme is to be
_love_. For emphasis also she curves the whole upper part of her body
towards him, to exhibit the intensity of her passion. To complete the
mimic story, she makes with her left hand the sign of _asking_ for
something, which has been above described (see page 291). The letter,
then, is to assure her husband of her love and to beg him to return it
with corresponding affection. The other woman, perhaps her sister, who
has understood the whole direction, regards the request as silly and
fruitless and is much disgusted. Being on her feet, she takes a step
toward the wife, who she thinks is unadvised, and raises her left hand
with a sign of disapprobation. This position of the hand is described
in full as open, raised high, and oscillated from right to left.
Several of the Indian signs have the same idea of oscillation of
the hand raised, often near the head, to express _folly, fool_. She
clearly says, "What a thing to ask! what a fool you are!" and at the
same time makes with the right hand the sign of _money_. This is made
by the extremities of the thumb and index rapidly rubbed against each
other, and is shown more clearly in Fig. 77. It is taken from the
handling and counting of coin. This may be compared with an Indian
sign, see Fig. 115, page 344.

So the sister is clearly disapproving with her left hand and with her
right giving good counsel, as if to say, in the combination, "What a
fool you are to ask for his love; you had better ask him to send you
some money."

* * * * *

[Illustration: Fig. 78.--Neapolitan hot-corn vender.]

[Illustration: Fig. 79.]

[Illustration: Fig. 80.]

In Naples, as in American cities, boiled ears of green corn are vended
with much outcry. Fig. 78 shows a boy who is attracted by the local
cry "_Pollanchelle tenerelle!_" and seeing the sweet golden ears still
boiling in the kettle from which steams forth fragrance, has an ardent
desire to taste the same, but is without a _soldo_. He tries begging.
His right open hand is advanced toward the desired object with the
sign of _asking_ or _begging_, and he also raises his left forefinger
to indicate the number one--"Pretty girl, please only give me one!"
The pretty girl is by no means cajoled, and while her left hand holds
the ladle ready to use if he dares to touch her merchandise, she
replies by gesture "_Te voglio da no cuorno!_" freely translated,
"I'll give you one _in a horn!_" This gesture is drawn, with clearer
outline in Fig. 79, and has many significations, according to the
subject-matter and context, and also as applied to different parts of
the body. Applied to the head it has allusion, descending from high
antiquity, to a marital misfortune which was probably common in
prehistoric times as well as the present. It is also often used as an
amulet against the _jettatura_ or evil eye, and misfortune in general,
and directed toward another person is a prayerful wish for his or her
preservation from evil. This use is ancient, as is shown on medals
and statues, and is supposed by some to refer to the horns of animals
slaughtered in sacrifice. The position of the fingers, Fig. 80, is
also given as one of Quintilian's oratorical gestures by the words
"_Duo quoque medii sub pollicem veniunt_," and is said by him to be
vehement and connected with reproach or argument. In the present case,
as a response to an impertinent or disagreeable petition, it simply
means, "instead of giving what you ask, I will give you nothing but
what is vile and useless, as horns are."

* * * * *

Fig. 81 tells a story which is substantially the foundation of the
slender plot of most modern scenic pantomimes preliminary to the
bursting forth from their chrysalides of Harlequin, Columbine,
Pantaloon, and company. A young girl, with the consent of her parents,
has for some time promised her hand to an honest youth. The old
mother, in despite of her word, has taken a caprice to give her
daughter to another suitor. The father, though much under the sway of
his spouse, is in his heart desirous to keep his engagement, and has
called in the notary to draw the contract. At this moment the scene
begins, the actors of which, for greater perspicuity and brevity, may
be provided with stage names as follows:

Cecca, diminutive for Francisca, the mother of--
Nanella, diminutive of Antoniella, the betrothed of--
Peppino, diminutive of Peppe, which is diminutive of Giuseppe.
Pasquale, husband of Cecca and father of Nanella.
Tonno, diminutive of Antonio, favored by Cecca.
D. Alfonso, notary.

[Illustration: Fig. 81.--Disturbance at signing of Neapolitan marriage
contract.]

[Illustration: Fig. 82.]

Cecca tries to pick a quarrel with Peppino, and declares that
the contract shall not be signed. He reminds her of her promise,
and accuses her of breach of faith. In her passion she calls
on her daughter to repudiate her lover, and casting her arms
around her, commands her to make the sign of breaking off
friendship--"_scocchiare_"--which, she has herself made to Peppino,
and which consists in extending the hand with the joined ends of
finger and thumb before described, see Fig. 66, and then separating
them, thus breaking the union. This the latter reluctantly pretends
to do with one hand, yet with the other, which is concealed from her
irate mother's sight, shows her constancy by continuing with emphatic
pressure the sign of _love_. According to the gesture vocabulary, on
the sign _scocchiare_ being made to a person who is willing to accept
the breach of former affection, he replies in the same manner, or
still more forcibly by inserting the index of the other hand between
the index and thumb of the first, thus showing the separation by the
presence of a material obstacle. Simply refraining from holding out
the hand in any responsive gesture is sufficient to indicate that
the breach is not accepted, but that the party addressed desires to
continue in friendship instead of resolving into enmity. This weak
and inactive negative, however, does not suit Peppino's vivacity, who,
placing his left hand on his bosom, makes, with his right, one of the
signs for emphatic negation. This consists of the palm turned to the
person addressed with the index somewhat extended and separated from
the other fingers, the whole hand being oscillated from right to left.
This gesture appears on ancient Greek vases, and is compound, the
index being demonstrative and the negation shown by the horizontal
oscillation, the whole being translatable as, "That thing I want not,
won't have, reject." The sign is virtually the same as that made by
Arapaho and Cheyenne Indians (see EXTRACTS FROM DICTIONARY, page 440,
_infra_.). The conception of oscillation to show negation also appears
with different execution in the sign of the Jicarilla Apaches and the
Pai-Utes, Fig. 82. The same sign is reported from Japan, in the same
sense.

[Illustration: Fig. 83.--Coming home of Neapolitan bride.]

Tonno, in hopes that the quarrel is definitive, to do his part in
stopping the ceremony, proceeds to blow out the three lighted candles,
which are an important traditional feature of the rite. The good old
man Pasquale, with his hands extended, raised in surprised displeasure
and directed toward the insolent youth, stops his attempt. The veteran
notary, familiar with such quarrels in his experience, smiles at this
one, and, continuing in his quiet attitude, extends his right hand
placidly to Peppino with the sign of _adagio_, before described, see
Fig. 68, advising him not to get excited, but to persist quietly, and
all would be well.

* * * * *

Fig. 83 portrays the first entrance of a bride to her husband's
house. She comes in with a tender and languid mien, her pendent
arms indicating soft yielding, and the right hand loosely holds a
handkerchief, ready to apply in case of overpowering emotion. She is,
or feigns to be, so timid and embarrassed as to require support by
the arm of a friend who introduces her. She is followed by a male
friend of the family, whose joyful face is turned toward supposed
by-standers, right hand pointing to the new acquisition, while with
his left he makes the sign of horns before described, see Fig. 79,
which in this connection is to wish prosperity and avert misfortune,
and is equivalent to the words in the Neapolitan dialect,
"_Mal'uocchie non nce pozzano_"--may evil eyes never have power over
her.

[Illustration: Fig. 84.]

The female confidant, who supports and guides her embarrassed
friend with her right arm, brings her left hand into the sign of
_beautiful_--"See what a beauty she is!" This sign is made by the
thumb and index open and severally lightly touching each side of the
lower cheek, the other fingers open. It is given on a larger scale and
slightly varied in Fig. 84, evidently referring to a fat and rounded
visage. Almost the same sign is made by the Ojibwas of Lake Superior,
and a mere variant of it is made by the Dakotas--stroking the cheeks
alternately down to the tip of the chin with the palm or surface of
the extended fingers.

[Illustration: Fig. 85.]

The mother-in-law greets the bride by making the sign _mano in fica_
with her right hand. This sign, made with the hand clenched and
the point of the thumb between and projecting beyond the fore and
middle fingers, is more distinctly shown in Fig. 85. It has a very
ancient origin, being found on Greek antiques that have escaped the
destruction of time, more particularly in bronzes, and undoubtedly
refers to the _pudendum muliebre_. It is used offensively and
ironically, but also--which is doubtless the case in this instance--as
an invocation or prayer against evil, being more forcible than the
horn-shaped gesture before described. With this sign the Indian sign
for _female_, see Fig. 132, page 357, _infra_, may be compared.

The mother-in-law also places her left hand hollowed in front of her
abdomen, drawing with it her gown slightly forward, thereby making a
pantomimic representation of the state in which "women wish to be who
love their lords"; the idea being plainly an expressed hope that the
household will be blessed with a new generation.

[Illustration: Fig. 86.]

[Illustration: Fig. 87.]

Next to her is a hunchback, who is present as a familiar clown or
merrymaker, and dances and laughs to please the company, at the same
time snapping his fingers. Two other illustrations of this action, the
middle finger in one leaving and in the other having left the thumb
and passed to its base, are seen in Figs. 86, 87. This gesture by
itself has, like others mentioned, a great variety of significations,
but here means _joy_ and acclamation. It is frequently used among us
for subdued applause, less violent than clapping the two hands, but
still oftener to express negation with disdain, and also carelessness.
Both these uses of it are common in Naples, and appear in Etruscan
vases and Pompeian paintings, as well as in the classic authors. The
significance of the action in the hand of the contemporary statue of
Sardanapalus at Anchiale is clearly _worthlessness_, as shown by the
inscription in Assyrian, "Sardanapalus, the son of Anacyndaraxes,
built in one day Anchiale and Tarsus. Eat, drink, play; the rest is
not worth _that_!"

[Illustration: Fig. 88.]

The bridegroom has left his mother to do the honors to the bride, and
himself attends to the rest of the company, inviting one of them to
drink some wine by a sign, enlarged in Fig. 88, which is not merely
pointing to the mouth with the thumb, but the hand with the incurved
fingers represents the body of the common glass flask which the
Neapolitans use, the extended thumb being its neck; the invitation is
therefore specially to drink wine. The guest, however, responds by
a very obvious gesture that he don't wish anything to drink, but he
would like to eat some macaroni, the fingers being disposed as if
handling that comestible in the fashion of vulgar Italians. If the
idea were only to eat generally, it would have been expressed by the
fingers and thumb united in a point and moved several times near and
toward the mouth, not raised above it, as is necessary for suspending
the strings of macaroni.

[Illustration: Fig. 89.--Quarrel between Neapolitan women.]

In Fig. 89 the female in the left of the group is much disgusted at
seeing one of her former acquaintances, who has met with good fortune,
promenade in a fine costume with her husband. Overcome with jealousy,
she spreads out her dress derisively on both sides, in imitation of
the hoop-skirts once worn by women of rank, as if to say "So you are
playing the great lady!" The insulted woman, in resentment, makes with
both hands, for double effect, the sign of horns, before described,
which in this case is done obviously in menace and imprecation. The
husband is a pacific fellow who is not willing to get into a woman's
quarrel, and is very easily held back by a woman and small boy who
happen to join the group. He contents himself with pretending to be in
a great passion and biting his finger, which gesture may be collated
with the emotional clinching of the teeth and biting the lips in
anger, common to all mankind.

[Illustration: Fig. 90.--The cheating Neapolitan chestnut huckster.]

[Illustration: Fig. 91.]

In Fig. 90 a contadina, or woman from the country, who has come to the
city to sell eggs (shown to be such by her head-dress, and the form of
the basket which she has deposited on the ground), accosts a vender of
roast chestnuts and asks for a measure of them. The chestnut huckster
says they are very fine and asks a price beyond that of the market;
but a boy sees that the rustic woman is not sharp in worldly matters
and desires to warn her against the cheat. He therefore, at the moment
when he can catch her eye, pretending to lean upon his basket, and
moving thus a little behind the huckster, so as not to be seen, points
him out with his index finger, and lays his left forefinger under his
eye, pulling down the skin slightly, so as to deform the regularity
of the lower eyelid. This is a _warning against a cheat_, shown more
clearly in Fig. 91. This sign primarily indicates a squinting person,
and metaphorically one whose looks cannot be trusted, even as in
a squinting person you cannot be certain in which direction he is
looking.

[Illustration: Fig. 92.]

Fig. 92 shows the extremities of the index and thumb closely joined in
form of a cone, and turned down, the other fingers held at pleasure,
and the hand and arm advanced to the point and held steady. This
signifies _justice_, a just person, that which is just and right. The
same sign may denote friendship, a menace, which specifically is that
of being brought to justice, and snuff, i.e. powdered tobacco; but the
expression of the countenance and the circumstance of the use of the
sign determine these distinctions. Its origin is clearly the balance
or emblem of justice, the office of which consists in ascertaining
physical weight, and thence comes the moral idea of distinguishing
clearly what is just and accurate and what is not. The hand is
presented in the usual manner of holding the balance to weigh
articles.

[Illustration: Fig. 93.]

[Illustration: Fig. 94.]

Fig. 93 signifies _little, small_, both as regards the size of
physical objects or figuratively, as of a small degree of talent,
affection, or the like. It is made either by the point of the thumb
placed under the end of the index (a), or _vice versa_ (b), and the
other fingers held at will, but separated from those mentioned. The
intention is to exhibit a small portion either of the thumb or
index separated from the rest of the hand. The gesture is found in
Herculanean bronzes, with obviously the same signification. The
signs made by some tribes of Indians for the same conception are very
similar, as is seen by Figs. 94 and 95.

[Illustration: Fig. 95.]

[Illustration: Fig. 96.]

Fig. 96 is simply the index extended by itself. The other fingers are
generally bent inwards and pressed down by the thumb, as mentioned by
Quintilian, but that is not necessary to the gesture if the forefinger
is distinctly separated from the rest. It is most commonly used for
indication, pointing out, as it is over all the world, from which
comes the name index, applied by the Romans as also by us, to the
forefinger. In different relations to the several parts of the
body and arm positions it has many significations, e.g., attention,
meditation, derision, silence, number, and demonstration in general.

[Illustration: Fig. 97.]

Fig. 97 represents the head of a jackass, the thumbs being the ears,
and the separation of the little from the third fingers showing the
jaws.

[Illustration: Fig. 98.]

Fig. 98 is intended to portray the head of the same animal in a front
view, the hands being laid upon each other, with thumbs extending on
each side to represent the ears. In each case the thumbs are generally
moved forward and back, in the manner of the quadruped, which, without
much apparent reason, has been selected as the emblem of stupidity.
The sign, therefore, means _stupid, fool_. Another mode of executing
the same conception--the ears of an ass--is shown in Fig. 99, where
the end of the thumb is applied to the ear or temple and the hand
is wagged up and down. Whether the ancient Greeks had the same low
opinion of the ass as is now entertained is not clear, but they
regarded long ears with derision, and Apollo, as a punishment to Midas
for his foolish decision, bestowed on him the lengthy ornaments of the
patient beast.

[Illustration: Fig. 99.]

[Illustration: Fig. 100.]

Fig. 100 is the fingers elongated and united in a point, turned
upwards. The hand is raised slightly toward the face of the gesturer
and shaken a few times in the direction of the person conversed with.
This is _inquiry_, not a mere interrogative, but to express that the
person addressed has not been clearly understood, perhaps from the
vagueness or diffusiveness of his expressions. The idea appears to
suggest the gathering of his thoughts together into one distinct
expression, or to be _pointed_ in what he wishes to say.

_Crafty, deceitful_, Fig. 101. The little fingers of both reversed
hands are hooked together, the others open but slightly curved, and,
with the hands, moved several times to the right and left. The gesture
is intended to represent a crab and the tortuous movements of the
crustacean, which are likened to those of a man who cannot be depended
on in his walk through life. He is not straight.

[Illustration: Fig. 101.]

[Illustration: Fig. 102.]

Figs. 102 and 103 are different positions of the hand in which the
approximating thumb and forefinger form a circle. This is the direst
insult that can be given. The amiable canon De Jorio only hints at
its special significance, but it may be evident to persons aware of a
practice disgraceful to Italy. It is very ancient.

[Illustration: Fig. 104.]

[Illustration: Fig. 103.]

Fig. 104 is easily recognized as a request or command to be _silent_,
either on the occasion or on the subject. The mouth, supposed to be
forcibly closed, prevents speaking, and the natural gesture, as might
be supposed, is historically ancient, but the instance, frequently
adduced from the attitude of the god Harpokrates, whose finger is on
his lips, is an error. The Egyptian hieroglyphists, notably in the
designation of Horus, their dawn-god, used the finger in or on the
lips for "child." It has been conjectured in the last instance that
the gesture implied, not the mode of taking nourishment, but inability
to speak--_in-fans_. This conjecture, however, was only made to
explain the blunder of the Greeks, who saw in the hand placed
connected with the mouth in the hieroglyph of Horus (the) son,
"Hor-(p)-chrot," the gesture familiar to themselves of a finger on
the lips to express "silence," and so, mistaking both the name and the
characterization, invented the God of Silence, Harpokrates. A careful
examination of all the linear hieroglyphs given by Champollion
(_Dictionnaire Egyptien_) shows that the finger or the hand to the
mouth of an adult (whose posture is always distinct from that of
a child) is always in connection with the positive ideas of voice,
mouth, speech, writing, eating, drinking, &c., and never with the
negative idea of silence. The special character for _child_, Fig.
105, always has the above-mentioned part of the sign with reference to
nourishment from the breast.

[Illustration: Fig. 105.]

Fig. 106 is a forcible _negation_. The outer ends of the fingers
united in a point under the chin are violently thrust forward. This
is the rejection of an idea or proposition, the same conception being
executed in several different modes by the North American Indians.

[Illustration: Fig. 106.]

Fig. 107 signifies _hunger_, and is made by extending the thumb
and index under the open mouth and turning them horizontally and
vertically several times. The idea is emptiness and desire to be
filled. It is also expressed by beating the ribs with the flat hands,
to show that the sides meet or are weak for the want of something
between them.

[Illustration: Fig. 107.]

Fig. 108 is made in mocking and ridicule. The open and oscillating
hand touches the point of the nose with that of the thumb. It has the
particular sense of stigmatizing the person addressed or in question
as a dupe. A credulous person is generally imagined with a gaping
mouth and staring eyes, and as thrusting forward his face, with
pendant chin, so that the nose is well advanced and therefore most
prominent in the profile. A dupe is therefore called _naso lungo_
or long-nose, and with Italian writers "_restare con un palmo di
naso_"--to be left with a palm's length of nose--means to have met
with loss, injury, or disappointment.

[Illustration: Fig. 108.]

The thumb stroking the forehead from one side to the other, Fig. 109,
is a natural sign of _fatigue_, and of the physical toil that produces
fatigue. The wiping off of perspiration is obviously indicated. This
gesture is often used ironically.

[Illustration: Fig. 109.]

As a _dupe_ was shown above, now the _duper_ is signified, by Fig.
110. The gesture is to place the fingers between the cravat and the
neck and rub the latter with the back of the hand. The idea is that
the deceit is put within the cravat, taken in and down, similar to our
phrase to "swallow" a false and deceitful story, and a "cram" is also
an English slang word for an incredible lie. The conception of the
slang term is nearly related to that of the Neapolitan sign, viz., the
artificial enlargement of the oesophagus of the person victimized or
on whom imposition is attempted to be practiced, which is necessary to
take it down.

[Illustration: Fig. 110.]

Fig. 111 shows the ends of the index and thumb stroking the two sides
of the nose from base to point. This means _astute, attentive, ready_.
Sharpness of the nasal organ is popularly associated with subtlety
and finesse. The old Romans by _homo emunctae naris_ meant an acute
man attentive to his interests. The sign is often used in a bad sense,
then signifying _too_ sharp to be trusted.

[Illustration: Fig. 111.]

This somewhat lengthy but yet only partial list of Neapolitan
gesture-signs must conclude with one common throughout Italy, and also
among us with a somewhat different signification, yet perhaps also
derived from classic times. To express suspicion of a person the
forefinger of the right hand is placed upon the side of the nose. It
means _tainted_, not sound. It is used to give an unfavorable report
of a person inquired of and to warn against such.

* * * * *

The Chinese, though ready in gesticulation and divided by dialects,
do not appear to make general use of a systematic sign language, but
they adopt an expedient rendered possible by the peculiarity of their
written characters, with which a large proportion of their adults
are acquainted, and which are common in form to the whole empire. The
inhabitants of different provinces when meeting, and being unable to
converse orally, do not try to do so, but write the characters of the
words upon the ground or trace them on the palm of the hand or in the
air. Those written characters each represent words in the same manner
as do the Arabic or Roman numerals, which are the same to Italians,
Germans, French, and English, and therefore intelligible, but if
expressed in sound or written in full by the alphabet, would not be
mutually understood. This device of the Chinese was with less apparent
necessity resorted to in the writer's personal knowledge between
a Hungarian who could talk Latin, and a then recent graduate from
college who could also do so to some extent, but their pronunciation
was so different as to occasion constant difficulty, so they both
wrote the words on paper, instead of attempting to speak them.

The efforts at intercommunication of all savage and barbarian tribes,
when brought into contact with other bodies of men not speaking
an oral language common to both, and especially when uncivilized
inhabitants of the same territory are separated by many linguistic
divisions, should in theory resemble the devices of the North American
Indians. They are not shown by published works to prevail in the
Eastern hemisphere to the same extent and in the same manner as
in North America. It is, however, probable that they exist in many
localities, though not reported, and also that some of them survive
after partial or even high civilization has been attained, and
after changed environment has rendered their systematic employment
unnecessary. Such signs may be, first, unconnected with existing
oral language, and used in place of it; second, used to explain or
accentuate the words of ordinary speech, or third, they may consist
of gestures, emotional or not, which are only noticed in oratory
or impassioned conversation, being, possibly, survivals of a former
gesture language.

From correspondence instituted it may be expected that a considerable
collection of signs will be obtained from West and South Africa,
India, Arabia, Turkey, the Fiji Islands, Sumatra, Madagascar, Ceylon,
and especially from Australia, where the conditions are similar
in many respects to those prevailing in North America prior to the
Columbian discovery. In the _Aborigines of Victoria, Melbourne_,
1878, by R. Brough Smythe, the author makes the following curious
remarks: "It is believed that they have several signs, known only to
themselves, or to those among the whites who have had intercourse
with them for lengthened periods, which convey information readily
and accurately. Indeed, because of their use of signs, it is the firm
belief of many (some uneducated and some educated) that the natives of
Australia are acquainted with the secrets of Freemasonry."

In the _Report of the cruise of the United States Revenue steamer
Corwin in the Arctic Ocean, Washington_, 1881, it appears that
the Innuits of the northwestern extremity of America use signs
continually. Captain Hooper, commanding that steamer, is reported
by Mr. Petroff to have found that the natives of Nunivak Island, on
the American side, below Behring Strait, trade by signs with those
of the Asiatic coast, whose language is different. Humboldt in his
journeyings among the Indians of the Orinoco, where many small
isolated tribes spoke languages not understood by any other, found the
language of signs in full operation. Spix and Martius give a similar
account of the Puris and Coroados of Brazil.

* * * * *

It is not necessary to enlarge under the present heading upon the
signs of deaf-mutes, except to show the intimate relation between sign
language as practiced by them and the gesture signs, which, even
if not "natural," are intelligible to the most widely separated of
mankind. A Sandwich Islander, a Chinese, and the Africans from the
slaver Amistad have, in published instances, visited our deaf-mute
institutions with the same result of free and pleasurable intercourse;
and an English deaf-mute had no difficulty in conversing with
Laplanders. It appears, also, on the authority of Sibscota, whose
treatise was published in 1670, that Cornelius Haga, ambassador of
the United Provinces to the Sublime Porte, found the Sultan's mutes
to have established a language among themselves in which they
could discourse with a speaking interpreter, a degree of ingenuity
interfering with the object of their selection as slaves unable to
repeat conversation. A curious instance has also been reported to the
writer of operatives in a large mill where the constant rattling of
the machinery rendered them practically deaf during the hours of work
and where an original system of gestures was adopted.

In connection with the late international convention, at Milan, of
persons interested in the instruction of deaf-mutes which, in the
enthusiasm of the members for the new system of artificial articulate
speech, made war upon all gesture-signs, it is curious that such
prohibition of gesture should be urged regarding mutes when it was
prevalent to so great an extent among the speaking people of the
country where the convention was held, and when the advocates of it
were themselves so dependent on gestures to assist their own oratory
if not their ordinary conversation. Artificial articulation surely
needs the aid of significant gestures more, when in the highest
perfection to which it can attain, than does oral speech in its own
high development. The use of artificial speech is also necessarily
confined to the oral language acquired by the interlocutors and throws
away the advantage of universality possessed by signs.

_USE BY MODERN ACTORS AND ORATORS._

Less of practical value can be learned of sign language, considered as
a system, from the study of gestures of actors and orators than would
appear without reflection. The pantomimist who uses no words whatever
is obliged to avail himself of every natural or imagined connection
between thought and gesture, and, depending wholly on the latter,
makes himself intelligible. On the stage and the rostrum words are
the main reliance, and gestures generally serve for rhythmic movement
and to display personal grace. At the most they give the appropriate
representation of the general idea expressed by the words, but do not
attempt to indicate the idea itself. An instance is recorded of
the addition of significance to gesture when it is employed by the
gesturer, himself silent, to accompany words used by another. Livius
Andronicus, being hoarse, obtained permission to have his part sung by
another actor while he continued to make the gestures, and he did
so with much greater effect than before, as Livy, the historian,
explains, because he was not impeded by the exertion of the voice;
but the correct explanation probably is, because his attention was
directed to ideas, not mere words.

GESTURES OF ACTORS.

To look at the performance of a play through thick glass or with
closed ears has much the same absurd effect that is produced by
also stopping the ears while at a ball and watching the apparently
objectless capering of the dancers, without the aid of musical
accompaniment. Diderot, in his _Lettre sur les sourds muets_, gives
his experience as follows:

"I used frequently to attend the theater and I knew by heart most
of our good plays. Whenever I wished to criticise the movements and
gestures of the actors I went to the third tier of boxes, for the
further I was from them the better I was situated for this purpose.
As soon as the curtain rose, and the moment came when the other
spectators disposed themselves to listen, I put my fingers into my
ears, not without causing some surprise among those who surrounded me,
who, not understanding, almost regarded me as a crazy man who had
come to the play only not to hear it. I was very little embarrassed by
their comments, however, and obstinately kept my ears closed as long
as the action and gestures of the players seemed to me to accord with
the discourse which I recollected. I listened only when I failed to
see the appropriateness of the gestures.. There are few actors capable
of sustaining such a test, and the details into which I could enter
would be mortifying to most of them."

It will be noticed that Diderot made this test with regard to the
appropriate gestural representation of plays that he knew by heart,
but if he had been entirely without any knowledge of the plot, the
difficulty in his comprehending it from gestures alone would have been
enormously increased. When many admirers of Ristori, who were wholly
unacquainted with the language in which her words were delivered,
declared that her gesture and expression were so perfect that they
understood every sentence, it is to be doubted if they would have been
so delighted if they had not been thoroughly familiar with the plots
of Queen Elizabeth and Mary Stuart. This view is confirmed by the case
of a deaf-mute, told to the writer by Professor FAY, who had prepared
to enjoy Ristori's acting by reading in advance the advertised play,
but on his reaching the theater another play was substituted and he
could derive no idea from its presentation. The experience of the
present writer is that he could gain very little meaning in detail out
of the performance at a Chinese theater, where there is much more
true pantomime than in the European, without a general notion of the
subject as conveyed from time to time by an interpreter. A crucial
test on this subject was made at the representation at Washington,
in April, 1881, of _Frou-Frou_ by Sarah Bernhardt and the excellent
French company supporting her. Several persons of special intelligence
and familiar with theatrical performances, but who did not understand
spoken French, and had not heard or read the play before or even seen
an abstract of it, paid close attention to ascertain what they could
learn of the plot and incidents from the gestures alone. This could be
determined in the special play the more certainly as it is not founded
on historic events or any known facts. The result was that from the
entrance of the heroine during the first scene in a peacock-blue
riding habit to her death in a black walking-suit, three hours or five
acts later, none of the students formed any distinct conception of the
plot. This want of apprehension extended even to uncertainty whether
_Gilberte_ was married or not; that is, whether her adventures were
those of a disobedient daughter or a faithless wife, and, if married,
which of the half dozen male personages was her husband. There were
gestures enough, indeed rather a profusion of them, and they were
thoroughly appropriate to the words (when those were understood) in
which fun, distress, rage, and other emotions were expressed, but in
no cases did they interpret the motive for those emotions. They were
the dressing for the words of the actors as the superb millinery
was that of their persons, and perhaps acted as varnish to bring out
dialogues and soliloquies in heightened effect. But though varnish can
bring into plainer view dull or faded characters, it cannot introduce
into them significance where none before existed. The simple fact was
that the gestures of the most famed histrionic school, the Comedie
Francaise, were not significant, far less self-interpreting, and
though praised as the perfection of art, have diverged widely
from nature. It thus appears that the absence of absolute
self-interpretation by gesture is by no means confined to the lower
grade of actors, such as are criticised in the old lines:

When to enforce some very tender part
His left hand sleeps by instinct on the heart;
His soul, of every other thought bereft,
Seems anxious only--where to place the left!

Without relying wholly upon the facts above mentioned, it will be
admitted upon reflection that however numerous and correct may be
the actually significant gestures made by a great actor in the
representation of his part, they must be in small proportion to the
number of gestures not at all significant, and which are no less
necessary to give to his declamation precision, grace, and force.
Significant gestures on the stage may be regarded in the nature of
high seasoning and ornamentation, which by undue use defeat their
object and create disgust. Histrionic perfection is, indeed, more
shown in the slight shades of movement of the head, glances of the
eye, and poises of the body than in violent attitudes; but these
slight movements are wholly unintelligible without the words uttered
with them. Even in the expression of strong emotion the same gesture
will apply to many and utterly diverse conditions of fact. The
greatest actor in telling that his father was dead can convey his
grief with a shade of difference from that which he would use if
saying that his wife had run away, his son been arrested for murder,
or his house burned down; but that shade would not without words
inform any person, ignorant of the supposed event, which of the four
misfortunes had occurred. A true sign language, however, would fully
express the exact circumstances, either with or without any exhibition
of the general emotion appropriate to them.

Even among the best sign-talkers, whether Indian or deaf-mute, it
is necessary to establish some _rapport_ relating to theme or
subject-matter, since many gestures, as indeed is the case in a
less degree with spoken words, have widely different significations,
according to the object of their exhibition, as well as the context.
Panurge (_Pantagruel_, Book III, ch. xix) hits the truth upon this
point, however ungallant in his application of it to the fair sex.
He is desirous to consult a dumb man, but says it would be useless
to apply to a woman, for "whatever it be that they see they do always
represent unto their fancies, and imagine that it hath some relation
to love. Whatever signs, shows, or gestures we shall make, or whatever
our behavior, carriage, or demeanor shall happen to be in their
view and presence, they will interpret the whole in reference to
androgynation." A story is told to the same point by Guevara, in his
fabulous life of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. A young Roman gentleman
encountering at the foot of Mount Celion a beautiful Latin lady, who
from her very cradle had been deaf and dumb, asked her in gesture what
senators in her descent from the top of the hill she had met with,
going up thither. She straightway imagined that he had fallen in love
with her and was eloquently proposing marriage, whereupon she at once
threw herself into his arms in acceptance. The experience of travelers
on the Plains is to the same general effect, that signs commonly used
to men are understood by women in a sense so different as to occasion
embarrassment. So necessary was it to strike the mental key-note
of the spectators by adapting their minds to time, place, and
circumstance, that even in the palmiest days of pantomime it was
customary for the crier to give some short preliminary explanation
of what was to be acted, which advantage is now retained by our
play-bills, always more specific when the performance is in a foreign
language, unless, indeed, the management is interested in the sale of
librettos.

GESTURES OF OUR PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

If the scenic gestures are so seldom significant, those appropriate to
oratory are of course still less so. They require energy, variety, and
precision, but also a degree of simplicity which is incompatible with
the needs of sign language. As regards imitation, they are restrained
within narrow bounds and are equally suited to a great variety of
sentiments. Among the admirable illustrations in Austin's _Chironomia_
of gestures applicable to the several passages in Gay's "Miser and
Plutus" one is given for "But virtue's sold" which is perfectly
appropriate, but is not in the slightest degree suggestive either
of virtue or of the transaction of sale. It could be used for an
indefinite number of thoughts or objects which properly excited
abhorrence, and therefore without the words gives no special
interpretation. Oratorical delivery demands general grace--cannot rely
upon the emotions of the moment for spontaneous appropriateness, and
therefore requires preliminary study and practice, such as are applied
to dancing and fencing with a similar object; indeed, accomplishment
in both dancing and fencing has been recommended as of use to
all orators. In reference to this subject a quotation from Lord
Chesterfield's letters is in place: "I knew a young man, who,
being just elected a member of Parliament, was laughed at for being
discovered, through the key-hole of his chamber door, speaking to
himself in the glass and forming his looks and gestures. I could not
join in that laugh, but, on the contrary, thought him much wiser than
those that laughed at him, for he knew the importance of those little
graces in a public assembly and they did not."

OUR INDIAN CONDITIONS FAVORABLE TO SIGN LANGUAGE.

In no other thoroughly explored part of the world has there been found
spread over so large a space so small a number of individuals divided
by so many linguistic and dialectic boundaries as in North America.
Many wholly distinct tongues have for an indefinitely long time been
confined to a few scores of speakers, verbally incomprehensible to
all others on the face of the earth who did not, from some rarely
operating motive, laboriously acquire their language. Even when the
American race, so styled, flourished in the greatest population of
which we have any evidence (at least according to the published views
of the present writer, which seem to have been generally accepted),
the immense number of languages and dialects still preserved, or known
by early recorded fragments to have once existed, so subdivided it
that only the dwellers in a very few villages could talk together with
ease. They were all interdistributed among unresponsive vernaculars,
each to the other being _bar-bar-ous_ in every meaning of the term.
The number of known stocks or families of Indian languages within the
territory of the United States amounts now to sixty-five, and these
differ among themselves as radically as each differs from the Hebrew,
Chinese, or English. In each of these linguistic families there are
several, sometimes as many as twenty, separate languages, which also
differ from each other as much as do the English, French, German, and
Persian divisions of the Aryan linguistic stock.

The use of gesture-signs, continued, if not originating, in necessity
for communication with the outer world, became entribally convenient
from the habits of hunters, the main occupation of all savages,
depending largely upon stealthy approach to game, and from the sole
form of their military tactics--to surprise an enemy. In the still
expanse of virgin forests, and especially in the boundless solitudes
of the great plains, a slight sound can be heard over a large area,
that of the human voice being from its rarity the most startling,
so that it is now, as it probably has been for centuries, a common
precaution for members of a hunting or war party not to speak together
when on such expeditions, communicating exclusively by signs. The
acquired habit also exhibits itself not only in formal oratory and
in impassioned or emphatic conversation, but also as a picturesque
accompaniment to ordinary social talk. Hon. LEWIS H. MORGAN mentions
in a letter to this writer that he found a silent but happy family
composed of an Atsina (commonly called Gros Ventre of the Prairie)
woman, who had been married two years to a Frenchman, during which
time they had neither of them attempted to learn each other's
language; but the husband having taken kindly to the language of
signs, they conversed together by that means with great contentment.
It is also often resorted to in mere laziness, one gesture saving
many words. The gracefulness, ingenuity, and apparent spontaneity of
the greater part of the signs can never be realized until actually
witnessed, and their beauty is much heightened by the free play to
which the arms of these people are accustomed, and the small and
well-shaped hands for which they are remarkable. Among them can seldom
be noticed in literal fact--

The graceless action of a heavy hand--

which the Bastard metaphorically condemns in King John.

The conditions upon which the survival of sign language among
the Indians has depended is well shown by those attending its
discontinuance among certain tribes.

Many instances are known of the discontinuance of gesture speech with
no development in the native language of the gesturers, but from the
invention for intercommunication of one used in common. The Kalapuyas
of Southern Oregon until recently used a sign language, but have
gradually adopted for foreign intercourse the composite tongue,
commonly called the Tsinuk or Chinook jargon, which probably arose for
trade purposes on the Columbia River before the advent of Europeans,
founded on the Tsinuk, Tsihali, Nutka, &c., but now enriched by
English and French terms, and have nearly forgotten their old signs.
The prevalence of this mongrel speech, originating in the same causes
that produced the pigeon-English or _lingua-franca_ of the Orient,
explains the marked scantiness of sign language among the tribes of
the Northwest coast.

Where the Chinook jargon has not extended on the coast to the North,
the Russian language commences, used in the same manner, but it
has not reached so deeply into the interior of the continent as the
Chinook, which has been largely adopted within the region bounded by
the eastern line of Oregon and Washington, and has become known even
to the Pai-Utes of Nevada. The latter, however, while using it with
the Oregonian tribes to their west and north, still keep up sign
language for communication with the Banaks, who have not become so
familiar with the Chinook. The Alaskan tribes on the coast also used
signs not more than a generation ago, as is proved by the fact that
some of the older men can yet converse by this means with the natives
of the interior, whom they occasionally meet. Before the advent of
the Russians the coast tribes traded their dried fish and oil for the
skins and paints of the eastern tribes by visiting the latter, whom
they did not allow to come to the coast, and this trade was conducted
mainly in sign language. The Russians brought a better market, so
the travel to the interior ceased, and with it the necessity for the
signs, which therefore gradually died out, and are little known to
the present generation on the coast, though still continuing in the
interior, where the inhabitants are divided by dialects.

No explanation is needed for the disuse of a language of signs for
the special purpose now in question when the speech of surrounding
civilization is recognized as necessary or important to be acquired,
and gradually becomes known as the best common medium, even before it
is actually spoken by many individuals of the several tribes. When
it has become general, signs, as systematically employed before,
gradually fade away.

THEORIES ENTERTAINED RESPECTING INDIAN SIGNS.

In this paper it is not designed to pronounce upon theories, and
certainly none will be advocated in a spirit of dogmatism. The writer
recognizes that the subject in its novelty specially requires an
objective and not a subjective consideration. His duty is to collect
the facts as they are, and this as soon as possible, since every
year will add to the confusion and difficulty. After the facts are
established the theories will take care of themselves, and their final
enunciation will be in the hands of men more competent than the writer
will ever pretend to be, although his knowledge, after careful study
of all data attainable, may be considerably increased. The mere
collection of facts, however, cannot be prosecuted to advantage
without predetermined rules of judgment, nor can they be classified at
all without the adoption of some principle which involves a tentative
theory. More than a generation ago Baader noticed that scientific
observers only accumulated great masses of separate facts without
establishing more connection between them than an arbitrary and
imperfect classification; and before him Goethe complained of the
indisposition of students of nature to look upon the universe as a
whole. But since the great theory of evolution has been brought to
general notice no one will be satisfied at knowing a fact without also
trying to establish its relation to other facts. Therefore a working
hypothesis, which shall not be held to with tenacity, is not only
allowable but necessary. It is also important to examine with proper
respect the theories advanced by others. Some of these, suggested in
the few publications on the subject and also by correspondents, will
be mentioned.

_NOT CORRELATED WITH MEAGERNESS OF LANGUAGE._

The story has been told by travelers in many parts of the world that
various languages cannot be clearly understood in the dark by their
possessors, using their mother tongue between themselves. The evidence
for this anywhere is suspicious; and when it is asserted, as it
often has been, in reference to some of the tribes of North American
Indians, it is absolutely false, and must be attributed to the error
of travelers who, ignorant of the dialect, never see the natives
except when trying to make themselves intelligible to their visitors
by a practice which they have found by experience to have been
successful with strangers to their tongue, or perhaps when they are
guarding against being overheard by others. Captain Burton, in his
_City of the Saints_, specially states that the Arapahos possess a
very scanty vocabulary, pronounced in a quasi-unintelligible way, and
can hardly converse with one another in the dark. The truth is that
their vocabulary is by no means scanty, and they do converse with each
other with perfect freedom without any gestures when they so please.
The difficulty in speaking or understanding their language is in the
large number of guttural and interrupted sounds which are not helped
by external motions of the mouth and lips in articulation, and the
light gives little advantage to its comprehension so far as concerns
the vocal apparatus, which, in many languages, can be seen as well
as heard, as is proved by the modern deaf-mute practice of artificial
speech. The corresponding story that no white man ever learned Arapaho
is also false. A member of Fremont's party so long ago as 1842 spoke
the language. Burton in the same connection gives a story "of a
man who, being sent among the Cheyennes to qualify himself for
interpreting, returned in a week and proved his competency; all he
did, however, was to go through the usual pantomime with a running
accompaniment of grunts." And he might as well have omitted the
grunts, for he obviously only used sign language. Lieutenant Abert, in
1846-'47, made much more sensible remarks from his actual observation
than Captain Burton repeated at second-hand from a Mormon met by
him at Salt Lake. He said: "Some persons think that it [the Cheyenne
language] would be incomplete without gesture, because the Indians use
gestures constantly. But I have been assured that the language is in
itself capable of bodying forth any idea to which one may wish to give
utterance."

In fact, individuals of those American tribes specially instanced in
these reports as unable to converse without gesture, often, in their
domestic _abandon_, wrap themselves up in robes or blankets with only
breathing holes before the nose, so that no part of the body is seen,
and chatter away for hours, telling long stories. If in daylight
they thus voluntarily deprive themselves of the possibility of making
signs, it is clear that their preference for talks around the fire at
night is explicable by very natural reasons wholly distinct from the
one attributed. The inference, once carelessly made from the free use
of gesture by some of the Shoshonian stock, that their tongue was too
meager for use without signs, is refuted by the now ascertained fact
that their vocabulary is remarkably copious and their parts of speech
better differentiated than those of many people on whom no such
stigma has been affixed. The proof of this was seen in the writer's
experience, when Ouray, the head chief of the Utes, was at Washington,
in the early part of 1880, and after an interview with the Secretary
of the Interior made report of it to the rest of the delegation who
had not been present. He spoke without pause in his own language for
nearly an hour, in a monotone and without a single gesture. The reason
for this depressed manner was undoubtedly because he was very sad at
the result, involving loss of land and change of home; but the fact
remains that full information was communicated on a complicated
subject without the aid of a manual sign, and also without even
such change of inflection of voice as is common among Europeans. All
theories based upon the supposed poverty of American languages must be
abandoned.

The grievous accusation against foreign people that they have no
intelligible language is venerable and general. With the Greeks
the term [Greek: aglossos], "tongueless," was used synonymous with
[Greek: barbaros], "barbarian" of all who were not Greek. The name
"Slav," assumed by a grand division of the Aryan family, means "the
speaker," and is contradistinguished from the other peoples of the
world, such as the Germans, who are called in Russian "Njemez," that is,
"speechless." In Isaiah (xxxiii, 19) the Assyrians are called a people
"of a stammering tongue, that one cannot understand." The common use of
the expression "tongueless" and "speechless," so applied, has probably
given rise, as TYLOR suggests, to the mythical stories of actually
speechless tribes of savages, and the considerations and instances
above presented tend to discredit the many other accounts of languages
which are incomplete without the help of gesture. The theory that sign
language was in whole or in chief the original utterance of mankind
would be strongly supported by conclusive evidence to the truth of such
travelers' tales, but does not depend upon them. Nor, considering the
immeasurable period during which, in accordance with modern geologic
views, man has been on the earth, is it probable that any existing
races can be found in which speech has not obviated the absolute
necessity for gesture in communication among themselves. The signs
survive for convenience, used together with oral language, and for
special employment when language is unavailable.

A comparison sometimes drawn between sign language and that of our
Indians, founded on the statement of their common poverty in abstract
expressions, is not just to either. This paper will be written in
vain if it shall not suggest the capacities of gesture speech in that
regard, and a deeper study into Indian tongues has shown that they are
by no means so confined to the concrete as was once believed.

_ITS ORIGIN FROM ONE TRIBE OR REGION._

Col. Richard I. Dodge, United States Army, whose long experience among
the Indians entitles his opinion to great respect, says in a letter:

"The embodiment of signs into a systematic language is, I believe,
confined to the Indians of the Plains. Contiguous tribes gain, here
and there, a greater or less knowledge of this language; these again
extend the knowledge, diminished and probably perverted, to their
neighbors, until almost all the Indian tribes of the United States
east of the Sierras have some little smattering of it. The Plains
Indians believe the Kiowas to have invented the sign language, and
that by them its use was communicated to other Plains tribes. If this
is correct, analogy would lead us to believe that those tribes most
nearly in contact with the Kiowas would use it most fluently and
correctly, the knowledge becoming less as the contact diminishes.
Thus the Utes, though nearly contiguous (in territory) to the Plains
Indians, have only the merest 'picked up' knowledge of this language,
and never use it among themselves, simply because, they and the Plains
tribes having been, since the memory of their oldest men, in a chronic
state of war, there has been no social contact."

In another communication Colonel Dodge is still more definite:

"The Plains Indians themselves believe the sign language was invented
by the Kiowas, who holding an intermediate position between the
Comanches, Tonkaways, Lipans, and other inhabitants of the vast
plains of Texas, and the Pawnees, Sioux, Blackfeet, and other northern
tribes, were the general go-betweens, trading with all, making peace
or war with or for any or all. It is certain that the Kiowas are at
present more universally proficient in this language than any other
Plains tribe. It is also certain that the tribes farthest away from
them and with whom they have least intercourse use it with least
facility."

Dr. William H. Corbusier, assistant surgeon United States Army, a
valued contributor, gives information as follows:

"The traditions of the Indians point toward the south as the direction
from which the sign language came. They refer to the time when they
did not use it; and each tribe say they learned it from those south
of them. The Comanches, who acquired it in Mexico, taught it to the
Arapahoes and Kiowas, and from these the Cheyennes learned it. The
Sioux say that they had no knowledge of it before they crossed the
Missouri River and came in contact with the Cheyennes, but have quite
recently learned it from them. It would thus appear that the Plains
Indians did not invent it, but finding it adapted to their wants
adopted it as a convenient means of communicating with those whose
language they did not understand, and it rapidly spread from tribe
to tribe over the Plains. As the sign language came from Mexico,
the Spaniards suggest themselves as the introducers of it on this
continent. They are adepts in the use of signs. Cortez as he marched
through Mexico would naturally have resorted to signs in communicating
with the numerous tribes with which he came in contract. Finding them
very necessary, one sign after another would suggest itself and be
adopted by Spaniards and Indians, and, as the former advanced, one
tribe after another would learn to use them. The Indians on the
Plains, finding them so useful, preserved them and each tribe modified
them to suit their convenience, but the signs remained essentially
the same. The Shoshones took the sign language with them as they moved
northwest, and a few of the Piutes may have learned it from them, but
the Piutes as a tribe do not use it."

Mr. Ben. Clarke, the respected and skillful interpreter at Fort Reno
writes to the same general effect:

"The Cheyennes think that the sign language used by the Cheyennes,
Arapahoes, Ogallala and Brule Sioux, Kiowas, and Comanches originated
with the Kiowas. It is a tradition that, many years ago, when the
Northern Indians were still without horses, the Kiowas often raided
among the Mexican Indians and captured droves of horses on these
trips. The Northern Plains Indians used to journey to them and trade
for horses. The Kiowas were already proficient in signs, and the
others learned from them. It was the journeying to the South that
finally divided the Cheyennes, making the Northern and Southern
Cheyennes. The same may be said of the Arapahoes. That the Kiowas were
the first sign talkers is only a tradition, but as a tribe they are
now considered to be the best or most thorough of the Plains Indians."

Without engaging in any controversy on this subject it may be noticed
that the theory advanced supposes a comparatively recent origin of
sign language from one tribe and one region, whereas, so far as can be
traced, the conditions favorable to a sign language existed very long
ago and were co-extensive with the territory of North America occupied
by any of the tribes. To avoid repetition reference is made to the
discussion below under the heads of universality, antiquity, identity,
and permanence. At this point it is only desired to call attention
to the ancient prevalence of signs among tribes such as the Iroquois,
Wyandot, Ojibwa, and at least three generations back among the Crees
beyond our northern boundary and the Mandans and other far-northern
Dakotas, not likely at that time to have had communication, even
through intertribal channels, with the Kaiowas. It is also difficult
to understand how their signs would have in that manner reached
the Kutchin of Eastern Alaska and the Kutine and Selish of British
Columbia, who use signs now. At the same time due consideration must
be given to the great change in the intercommunication of tribes,
produced by the importation of the horse, by which the habits of
those Indians now, but not very anciently, inhabiting the Plains were
entirely changed. It is probable that a sign language before existing
became, contemporaneously with nomadic life, cultivated and enriched.

As regards the Spanish origin suggested, there is ample evidence that
the Spaniards met signs in their early explorations north of and in
the northern parts of Mexico, and availed themselves of them but did
not introduce them. It is believed also that the elaborate picture
writing of Mexico was founded on gesture signs.

With reference to the statement that the Kaiowas are the most expert
sign talkers of the Plains, a number of authorities and correspondents
give the precedence to the Cheyennes, and an equal number to the
Arapahos. Probably the accident of meeting specially skillful talkers
in the several tribes visited influences such opinions.

The writer's experience, both of the Utes and Pai-Utes, is different
from the above statement respecting the absence of signs among them.
They not only use their own signs but fully understand the difference
between the signs regarded as their own and those of the Kaiowas. On
special examination they understood some of the latter only as words
of a foreign language interpolated in an oral conversation would be
comprehended from the context, and others they would recognize as
having seen before among other tribes without adoption. The same is
true regarding the Brule Sioux, as was clearly expressed by Medicine
Bull, their chief. The Pimas, Papagos, and Maricopas examined had a
copious sign language, yet were not familiar with many Kaiowa signs
presented to them.

Instead of referring to a time past when they did not use signs, the
Indians examined by the writer and by most of his correspondents
speak of a time when they and their fathers used it more freely
and copiously than at present, its disuse being from causes before
mentioned. It, however, may be true in some cases that a tribe, having
been for a long time in contact only with others the dialect of which
was so nearly akin as to be comprehensible, or from any reason being
separated from those of a strange speech, discontinued sign language
for a time, and then upon migration or forced removal came into
circumstances where it was useful, and revived it. It is asserted that
some of the Muskoki and the Ponkas now in the Indian Territory never
saw sign language until they arrived there. Yet there is some evidence
that the Muskoki did use signs a century ago, and some of the Ponkas
still remaining on their old homes on the Missouri remember it and
have given their knowledge to an accurate correspondent, Rev. J.O.
Dorsey, though for many years they have not been in circumstances to
require its employment.

Perhaps the most salutary criticism to be offered regarding the theory
would be in the form of a query whether sign language has ever been
invented by any one body of people at any one time, and whether it is
not simply a phase in evolution, surviving and reviving when needed.
Criticism on this subject is made reluctantly, as it would be highly
interesting to determine that sign language on this continent came
from a particular stock, and to ascertain that stock. Such research
would be similar to that into the Aryan and Semitic sources to
which many modern languages have been traced backwards from existing
varieties, and if there appear to be existing varieties in signs their
roots may still be found to be _sui generis_. The possibility that the
discrepancy between signs was formerly greater than at present will
receive attention in discussing the distinction between the identity
of signs and their common use as an art. It is sufficient to add
now that not only does the burden of proof rest unfavorably upon
the attempt to establish one parent stock for sign language in North
America, but it also comes under the stigma now fastened upon the
immemorial effort to name and locate the original oral speech of man.
It is only next in difficulty to the old persistent determination
to decide upon the origin of the whole Indian "race," in which most
peoples of antiquity in the eastern hemisphere, including the
lost tribes of Israel, the Gipsies, and the Welsh, have figured
conspicuously as putative parents.

_IS THE INDIAN SYSTEM SPECIAL AND PECULIAR?_

This inquiry is closely connected with the last. If the system of
signs was invented here in the correct sense of that term, and by a
known and existing tribe, it is probable that it would not be
found prevailing in any important degree where the influence of the
inventors could not readily have penetrated. An affirmative answer
to the question also presupposes the same answer to another question,
viz, whether there is any one uniform system among the North American
Indians which can therefore be compared with any other system. This
last inquiry will be considered in its order. In comparing the system
as a whole with others, the latter are naturally divided into signs of
speaking men foreign to America and those of deaf-mutes.

COMPARISONS WITH FOREIGN SIGNS.

The generalization of TYLOR that "gesture language is substantially
the same among savage tribes all over the world," interpreted by his
remarks in another connection, is understood as referring to their
common use of signs, and of signs formed on the same principles, but
not of precisely the same signs to express the same ideas. In this
sense of the generalization the result of the writer's study not only
sustains it, but shows a surprising number of signs for the same idea
which are substantially identical, not only among savage tribes, but
among all peoples that use gesture signs with any freedom. Men, in
groping for a mode of communication with each other, and using the
same general methods, have been under many varying conditions and
circumstances which have determined differently many conceptions and
their semiotic execution, but there have also been many of both which
were similar. Our Indians have no special superstition concerning the
evil-eye like the Italians, nor have they been long familiar with the
jackass so as to make him emblematical of stupidity; therefore signs
for these concepts are not cisatlantic, but even in this paper many
are shown which are substantially in common between our Indians
and Italians. The large collection already obtained, but not now
published, shows many others identical, not only with those of the
Italians and the classic Greeks and Romans, but of other peoples of
the Old World, both savage and civilized. The generic uniformity
is obvious, while the occasion of specific varieties can be readily
understood.

COMPARISON WITH DEAF-MUTE SIGNS.

The Indians who have been shown over the civilized East have often
succeeded in holding intercourse, by means of their invention and
application of principles in what may be called the voiceless mother
utterance, with white deaf-mutes, who surely have no semiotic code
more nearly connected with that attributed to the plain-roamers
than is derived from their common humanity. They showed the greatest
pleasure in meeting deaf-mutes, precisely as travelers in a foreign
country are rejoiced to meet persons speaking their language, with
whom they can hold direct communication without the tiresome and often
suspected medium of an interpreter. When they met together they were
found to pursue the same course as that noticed at the meeting of
deaf-mutes who were either not instructed in any methodical dialect
or who had received such instruction by different methods. They often
disagreed in the signs at first presented, but soon understood them,
and finished by adopting some in mutual compromise, which proved to be
those most strikingly appropriate, graceful, and convenient; but there
still remained in some cases a plurality of fitting signs for the same
idea or object. On one of the most interesting of these occasions, at
the Pennsylvania Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, in 1873, it was
remarked that the signs of the deaf-mutes were much more readily
understood by the Indians, who were Absaroka or Crows, Arapahos, and
Cheyennes, than were theirs by the deaf-mutes, and that the latter
greatly excelled in pantomimic effect. This need not be surprising
when it is considered that what is to the Indian a mere adjunct or
accomplishment is to the deaf-mute the natural mode of utterance, and
that there is still greater freedom from the trammel of translating
words into action--instead of acting the ideas themselves--when, the
sound of words being unknown, they remain still as they originated,
but another kind of sign, even after the art of reading is acquired,
and do not become entities as with us. The "action, action, action,"
of Demosthenes is their only oratory, not the mere heightening of it,
however valuable.

On March 6, 1880, the writer had an interesting experience in taking
to the National Deaf-Mute College at Washington seven Utes (which
tribe, according to report, is unacquainted with sign language), among
whom were Augustin, Alejandro, Jakonik, Severio, and Wash. By the kind
attention of President GALLAUDET a thorough test was given, an equal
number of deaf-mute pupils being placed in communication with the
Indians, alternating with them both in making individual signs and in
telling narratives in gesture, which were afterwards interpreted in
speech by the Ute interpreter and the officers of the college. Notes
of a few of them were taken, as follows:

Among the signs was that for _squirrel_, given by a deaf-mute. The
right hand was placed over and facing the left, and about four inches
above the latter, to show the height of the animal; then the two hands
were held edgewise and horizontally in front, about eight inches apart
(showing _length_); then imitating the grasping of a small object and
biting it rapidly with the incisors, the extended index was pointed
upward and forward (_in a tree_).

This was not understood, as the Utes have no sign for the tree
squirrel, the arboreal animal not being now found in their region.

Deaf-mute sign for _jack-rabbit_: The first two fingers of each hand
extended (the remaining fingers and thumbs closed) were placed on
either side of the head, pointing upward; then arching the hands, palm
down, quick, interrupted, jumping movements forward were made.

This was readily understood.

The signs for the following narrative were given by a deaf-mute: When
he was a boy he mounted a horse without either bridle or saddle, and
as the horse began to go he grasped him by the neck for support; a dog
flew at the horse, began to bark, when the rider was thrown off and
considerably hurt.

In this the sign for _dog_ was as follows: Pass the arched hand
forward from the lower part of the face, to illustrate elongated nose
and mouth, then with both forefingers extended, remaining fingers and
thumbs closed, place them upon either side of the lower jaw, pointing
upward, to show lower canines, at the same time accompanying the
gesture with an expression of withdrawing the lips so as to show the
teeth snarling; then, with the fingers of the right hand extended and
separated throw them quickly forward and slightly upward (_voice_ or
_talking_).

This sign was understood to mean _bear_, as that for _dog_ is
different among the Utes, i.e., by merely showing the height of the
dog and pushing the flat hand forward, finger-tips first.

Another deaf-mute gestured to tell that when he was a boy he went to
a melon-field, tapped several melons, finding them to be green or
unripe; finally reaching a good one he took his knife, cut a slice,
and ate it. A man made his appearance on horseback, entered the patch
on foot, found the cut melon, and detecting the thief, threw the melon
towards him, hitting him in the back, whereupon he ran away crying.
The man mounted and rode off in an opposite direction.

All of these signs were readily comprehended, although some of the
Indians varied very slightly in their translation.

When the Indians were asked whether, if they (the deaf-mutes) were to
come to the Ute country they would be scalped, the answer was given,
"Nothing would be done to you; but we would be friends," as follows:

The palm of the right hand was brushed toward the right over that of
the left (_nothing_), and the right hand made to grasp the palm of
the left, thumbs extended over and lying upon the back of the opposing
hand.

This was readily understood by the deaf-mutes.

Deaf-mute sign of milking a cow and drinking the milk was fully and
quickly understood.

The narrative of a boy going to an apple-tree, hunting for ripe fruit
and filling his pockets, being surprised by the owner and hit upon the
head with a stone, was much appreciated by the Indians and completely
understood.

A deaf-mute asked Alejandro how long it took him to come to Washington
from his country. He replied by placing the index and second finger of
the right hand astride the extended forefinger (others closed) of the
left; then elevating the fingers of the left hand (except thumb and
forefinger) back forward (_three_); then extending the fingers of both
hands and bringing them to a point, thumbs resting on palmar sides and
extended, placing the hands in front of the body, the tips opposite
the opposing wrist, and about four inches apart; then, revolving them
in imitation of _wheels_, he elevated the extended forefinger of
the left hand (_one_); then placing the extended flat hands, thumbs
touching, the backs sloping downward towards the respective right
and left sides, like the roof of a house; then repeating the sign of
wheels as in the preceding, after which the left hand was extended
before the body, fingers toward the right, horizontal, palm down and
slightly arched, the right wrist held under it, the fingers extending
upward beyond it, and quickly and repeatedly snapped upward (_smoke_);
the last three signs being _covered--wagon--smoke_, i.e., _cars_; then
elevating four fingers of the left hand (_four_).

_Translation_.--Traveled three days on horseback, one in a wagon, and
four in the cars.

The deaf-mutes understood all but the sign for wheel, which they make
as a large circle, with _one_ hand.

Another example: A deaf-mute pretended to hunt something; found birds,
took his bow and arrows and killed several.

This was fully understood.

A narrative given by Alejandro was also understood by the deaf-mutes,
to the effect that he made search for deer, shot one with a gun,
killed and skinned it, and packed it up.

It will be observed that many of the above signs admitted of and were
expressed by pantomime, yet that was not the case with all that were
made. President GALLAUDET made also some remarks in gesture which were
understood by the Indians, yet were not strictly pantomimic.

The opinion of all present at the test was that two intelligent mimes
would seldom fail of mutual understanding, their attention being
exclusively directed to the expression of thoughts by the means of
comprehension and reply equally possessed by both, without the mental
confusion of conventional sounds only intelligible to one.

A large collection has been made of natural deaf-mute signs, and also
of those more conventional, which have been collated with those of the
several tribes of Indians. Many of them show marked similarity, not
only in principle but often in detail.

* * * * *

The result of the studies so far as prosecuted is that what is
called _the_ sign language of Indians is not, properly speaking, one
language, but that it and the gesture systems of deaf-mutes and of
all peoples constitute together one language--the gesture speech of
mankind--of which each system is a dialect.

_TO WHAT EXTENT PREVALENT AS A SYSTEM._

The assertion has been made by many writers, and is currently repeated
by Indian traders and some Army officers, that all the tribes of North
America have long had and still use a _common_ and _identical_
sign language, in which they can communicate freely without oral
assistance. Although this remarkable statement is at variance with
some of the principles of the formation and use of signs set forth
by Dr. E.B. TYLOR, whose admirable chapters on gesture speech in his
_Researches into the Early History of Mankind_ have in a great degree
prompted the present inquiries, that eminent authority did not see fit
to discredit it. He repeats the report as he received it, in the words
that "the same signs serve as a medium of converse from Hudson Bay to
the Gulf of Mexico." Its truth or falsity can only be established by
careful comparison of lists or vocabularies of signs taken under test
conditions at widely different times and places. For this purpose
lists have been collated by the writer, taken in different parts of
the country at several dates, from the last century to the last month,
comprising together several thousand signs, many of them, however,
being mere variants or synonyms for the same object or quality, some
being repetitions of others and some of small value from uncertainty
in description or authority, or both.

ONCE PROBABLY UNIVERSAL IN NORTH AMERICA.

The conclusion reached from the researches made is to the effect
that before the changes wrought by the Columbian discovery the use of
gesture illustrated the remark of Quintilian upon the same subject
(l. xi, c. 3) that "_In tanta per omnes gentes nationesque linguae
diversitate hic mihi omnium hominum communis sermo videatur._"

Quotations may be taken from some old authorities referring to widely
separated regions. The Indians of Tampa Bay, identified with the
Timucua, met by Cabeca de Vaca in 1528, were active in the use of
signs, and in his journeying for eight subsequent years, probably
through Texas and Mexico, he remarks that he passed through many
dissimilar tongues, but that he questioned and received the answers
of the Indians by signs "just as if they spoke our language and we
theirs." Michaelius, writing in 1628, says of the Algonkins on or near
the Hudson River: "For purposes of trading as much was done by signs
with the thumb and fingers as by speaking." In Bossu's _Travels
through that part of North America formerly called Louisiana_,
_London_, 1771 (Forster's translation), an account is given of
Monsieur de Belle-Isle some years previously captured by the Atak-apa,
who remained with them two years and "conversed in their pantomimes
with them." He was rescued by Governor Bienville and was sufficiently
expert in the sign language to interpret between Bienville and the
tribe. In Bushmann's _Spuren_, p. 424, there is a reference to the
"Accocessaws on the west side of the Colorado, two hundred miles
southwest of Nacogdoches," who use thumb signs which they understand:
"_Theilen sich aber auch durch Daum-Zeichen mit, die sie alle
verstehen._"

Omitting many authorities, and for brevity allowing a break in the
continuity of time, reference may be made to the statement in Major
Long's expedition of 1819, concerning the Arapahos, Kaiowas, Ietans,
and Cheyennes, to the effect that, being ignorant of each other's
languages, many of them when they met would communicate by means
of signs, and would thus maintain a conversation without the least
difficulty or interruption. A list of the tribes reported upon by
Prince Maximilian von Wied-Neuweid, in 1832-'34, appears elsewhere
in this paper. In Fremont's expedition of 1844 special and repeated
allusion is made to the expertness of the Pai-Utes in signs, which is
contradictory to the statement above made by correspondents. The same
is mentioned regarding a band of Shoshonis met near the summit of the
Sierra Nevada, and one of "Diggers," probably Chemehuevas, encountered
on a tributary of the Rio Virgen.

Ruxton, in his _Adventures in Mexico and the Rocky Mountains_, _New
York_, 1848, p. 278, sums up his experience with regard to the Western
tribes so well as to require quotation: "The language of signs is
so perfectly understood in the Western country, and the Indians
themselves are such admirable pantomimists, that, after a little use,
no difficulty whatever exists in carrying on a conversation by such
a channel; and there are few mountain men who are at a loss in
thoroughly understanding and making themselves intelligible by signs
alone, although they neither speak nor understand a word of the Indian
tongue."

Passing to the correspondents of the writer from remote parts of
North America, it is important to notice that Mr. J.W. Powell, Indian
superintendent, reports the use of sign language among the Kutine,
and Mr. James Lenihan, Indian agent, among the Selish, both tribes
of British Columbia. The Very Rev. Edward Jacker, while contributing
information upon the present use of gesture language among the Ojibwas
of Lake Superior, mentions that it has fallen into comparative neglect
because for three generations they had not been in contact with
tribes of a different speech. Dr. Francis H. Atkins, acting assistant
surgeon, United States Army, in forwarding a contribution of signs
of the Mescalero Apaches remarks: "I think it probable that they have
used sign language rather less than many other Indians. They do not
seem to use it to any extent at home, and abroad the only tribes they
were likely to come into contact with were the Navajos, the Lipans
of old Mexico, and the Comanches. Probably the last have been almost
alone their visiting neighbors. They have also seen the Pueblos
a little, these appearing to be, like the Phoenicians of old, the
traders of this region." He also alludes to the effect of the Spanish,
or rather _lingua Mexicana_, upon all the Southern tribes and, indeed,
upon those as far north as the Utes, by which recourse to signs is now
rendered less necessary.

Before leaving this particular topic it is proper to admit that, while
there is not only recorded testimony to the past use of gesture
signs by several tribes of the Iroquoian and Algonkian families, but
evidence that it still remains, it is, however, noticeable that these
families when met by their first visitors do not appear to have often
impressed the latter with their reliance upon gesture language to the
same extent as has always been reported of the tribes now and formerly
found farther inland. An explanation may be suggested from the
fact that among those families there were more people dwelling near
together in communities speaking the same language, though with
dialectic peculiarities, than became known later in the farther West,
and not being nomadic their intercourse with strange tribes was less
individual and conversational. Some of the tribes, in especial the
Iroquois proper, were in a comparatively advanced social condition. A
Mohawk or Seneca would probably have repeated the arrogance of the old
Romans, whom in other respects they resembled, and compelled persons
of inferior tribes to learn his language if they desired to converse
with him, instead of resorting to the compromise of gesture
speech, which he had practiced before the prowess and policy of the
confederated Five Nations had gained supremacy and which was still
used for special purposes between the members of his own tribe. The
studies thus far pursued lead to the conclusion that at the time of
the discovery of North America all its inhabitants practiced sign
language, though with different degrees of expertness, and that
while under changed circumstances it was disused by some, others, in
especial those who after the acquisition of horses became nomads of
the Great Plains, retained and cultivated it to the high development
now attained, from which it will surely and speedily decay.

MISTAKEN DENIAL THAT SIGN LANGUAGE EXISTS.

The most useful suggestion to persons interested in the collection
of signs is that they shall not too readily abandon the attempt to
discover recollections of them even among tribes long exposed
to European influence and officially segregated from others. The
instances where their existence, at first denied, has been ascertained
are important with reference to the theories advanced.

Rev. J. Owen Dorsey has furnished a considerable vocabulary of signs
finally procured from the Poncas, although, after residing among them
for years, with thorough familiarity with their language, and after
special and intelligent exertion to obtain some of their disused
gesture language, he had before reported it to be entirely forgotten.
A similar report was made by two missionaries among the Ojibwas,
though other trustworthy authorities have furnished a copious list
of signs obtained from that tribe. This is no imputation against
the missionaries, as in October, 1880, five intelligent Ojibwas from
Petoskey, Mich., told the writer that they had never heard of gesture
language. An interesting letter from Mr. B.O. Williams, sr., of
Owasso, Mich., explains the gradual decadence of signs used by the
Ojibwas in his recollection, embracing sixty years, as chiefly
arising from general acquaintance with the English language. Further
discouragement came from an Indian agent giving the decided statement,
after four years of intercourse with the Pai-Utes, that no such thing
as a communication by signs was known or even remembered by them,
which, however, was less difficult to bear because on the day of the
receipt of that well-intentioned missive some officers of the Bureau
of Ethnology were actually talking in signs with a delegation of that
very tribe of Indians then in Washington, from one of whom, Natci, a
narrative printed in this paper (page 500), was received.

The report from missionaries, army officers, and travelers in Alaska
was unanimous against the existence of a sign language there until
Mr. Ivan Petroff, whose explorations had been more extensive, gave
the excellent exposition and dialogue now produced (see page 492).
Collections were also obtained from the Apaches and Zuni, Pimas,
Papagos, and Maricopas, after agents and travelers had denied them to
be possessed of any knowledge on the subject.

For the reasons mentioned under the last heading, little hope was
entertained of procuring a collection from any of the Iroquoian stock,
but the intelligent and respectable chief of the Wyandots, Hento (Gray
Eyes), came to the rescue. His tribe was moved from Ohio in July,
1843, to the territory now occupied by the State of Kansas, and
then again moved to Indian Territory, in 1870. He asserts that about
one-third of the tribe, the older portion, know many signs, a partial
list of which he gave with their descriptions. He was sure that those
signs were used before the removal from Ohio, and he saw them used
also by Shawnees, Delawares, and Senecas there.

Unanimous denial of any existence of sign language came from the
British provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and was followed by the
collection obtained by the Hon. Horatio Hale. His statement of the
time and manner of its being procured by him is not only interesting
but highly instructive:

"The aged Mohawk chief, from whom the information on this subject has
been obtained, is commonly known by his English name of John
Smoke Johnson. 'Smoke' is a rude version of his Indian name,
_Sakayenkwaraton_, which may be rendered 'Disappearing Mist.' It is
the term applied to the haze which rises in the morning of an autumn
day, and gradually passes away. Chief Johnson has been for many years
'speaker' of the great council of the Six Nations. In former times he
was noted as a warrior, and later has been esteemed one of the most
eloquent orators of his race. At the age of eighty-eight years he
retains much of his original energy. He is considered to have a better
knowledge of the traditions and ancient customs of his people than
any other person now living. This superior knowledge was strikingly
apparent in the course of the investigations which were made
respecting the sign language. Two other members of his tribe,
well-educated and very intelligent men of middle age, the one a chief
and government interpreter, the other a clergyman now settled over a
white congregation, had both been consulted on the subject and both
expressed the opinion that nothing of the sign language, properly
speaking, was known among the Six Nations. They were alike surprised
and interested when the old chief, in their presence, after much
consideration, gradually drew forth from the stores of his memory the
proofs of an accomplishment which had probably lain unused for more
than half a century."

One of the most conclusive instances of the general knowledge of
sign language, even when seldom used, was shown in the visit of five
Jicarilla Apaches to Washington in April, 1880, under the charge of
Dr. Benjamin Thomas, their agent. The latter said he had never heard
of any use of signs among them. But it happened that there was a
delegation of Absaroka (Crows) at the same hotel, and the two parties
from such widely separated regions, not knowing a word of each other's
language, immediately began to converse in signs, resulting in a
decided sensation. One of the Crows asked the Apaches whether they ate
horses, and it happening that the sign for _eating_ was misapprehended
for that known by the Apaches for _many_, the question was supposed
to be whether the latter had many horses, which was answered in
the affirmative. Thence ensued a misunderstanding on the subject of
hippophagy, which was curious both as showing the general use of
signs as a practice and the diversity in special signs for particular
meanings. The surprise of the agent at the unsuspected accomplishment
of his charges was not unlike that of a hen who, having hatched a
number of duck eggs, is perplexed at the instinct with which the brood
takes to the water.

The denial of the use of signs is often faithfully though erroneously
reported from the distinct statements of Indians to that effect. In
that, as in other matters, they are often provokingly reticent about
their old habits and traditions. Chief Ouray asserted to the writer,
as he also did to Colonel Dodge, that his people, the Utes, had not
the practice of sign talk, and had no use for it. This was much in
the proud spirit in which an Englishman would have made the same
statement, as the idea involved an accusation against the civilization
of his people, which he wished to appear highly advanced. Still more
frequently the Indians do not distinctly comprehend what is sought
to be obtained. Sometimes, also, the art, abandoned in general,
only remains in the memories of a few persons influenced by special
circumstances or individual fancy.

In this latter regard a comparison may be made with the old science
of heraldry, once of practical use and a necessary part of a liberal
education, of which hardly a score of persons in the United States
have any but the vague knowledge that it once existed; yet the united
memories of those persons could, in the absence of records, reproduce
all essential points on the subject.

Another cause for the mistaken denial in question must be mentioned.
When travelers or sojourners have become acquainted with signs in
any one place they may assume that those signs constitute _the_ sign
language, and if they afterwards meet tribes not at once recognizing
those signs, they remove all difficulty about the theory of a "one and
indivisible" sign language by simply asserting that the tribes so met
do not understand _the_ sign language, or perhaps that they do not
use signs at all. This precise assertion has, as above mentioned, been
made regarding the Utes and Apaches. Of course, also, Indians who have
not been brought into sufficient contact with certain tribes using
different signs, for the actual trial which would probably result
in mutual comprehension, tell the travelers the same story. It is
the venerable one of "[Greek: aglossos]," "Njemez," "barbarian," and
"stammering," above noted, applied to the hands instead of the tongue.
Thus an observer possessed by a restrictive theory will find no signs
where they are in plenty, while another determined on the universality
and identity of sign language can, as elsewhere explained, produce,
from perhaps the same individuals, evidence in his favor from the
apparently conclusive result of successful communication.

PERMANENCE OF SIGNS.

In connection with any theory it is important to inquire into the
permanence of particular gesture signs to express a special idea or
object when the system has been long continued. Many examples have
been given above showing that the gestures of classic times are still
in use by the modern Italians with the same signification; indeed that
the former on Greek vases or reliefs or in Herculanean bronzes
can only be interpreted by the latter. In regard to the signs of
instructed deaf-mutes in this country there appears to be a permanence
beyond expectation. Mr. Edmund Booth, a pupil of the Hartford
Institute half a century ago, and afterwards a teacher, says in the
"_Annals_" for April, 1880, that the signs used by teachers and pupils
at Hartford, Philadelphia, Washington, Council Bluffs, and Omaha were
nearly the same as he had learned. "We still adhere to the old sign
for President from Monroe's three-cornered hat, and for governor we
designate the cockade worn by that dignitary on grand occasions three
generations ago."

The specific comparisons made, especially by Dr. Washington Matthews
and Dr. W.O. Boteler, of the signs reported by the Prince of Wied
in 1832 with those now used by the same tribes from whom he obtained
them, show a remarkable degree of permanency in many of those that
were so clearly described by the Prince as to be proper subjects of
any comparison. If they have persisted for half a century their age
is probably much greater. In general it is believed that signs,
constituting as they do a natural mode of expression, though enlarging
in scope as new ideas and new objects require to be included and
though abbreviated as hereinafter explained, do not readily change in
their essentials.

The writer has before been careful to explain that he does not present
any signs as precisely those of primitive man, not being so carried
away by enthusiasm as to suppose them possessed of immutability and
immortality not found in any other mode of human utterance. Yet such
signs as are generally prevalent among Indian tribes, and also in
other parts of the world, must be of great antiquity. The use of
derivative meanings to a sign only enhances this presumption. At
first there might not appear to be any connection between the ideas of
_same_ and _wife_, expressed by the sign of horizontally extending
the two forefingers side by side. The original idea was doubtless that
given by the Welsh captain in Shakspere's Henry V: "'Tis so like as
my fingers is to my fingers," and from this similarity comes "equal,"
"companion," and subsequently the close life-companion "wife." The
sign is used in each of these senses by different Indian tribes,
and sometimes the same tribe applies it in all of the senses as
the context determines. It appears also in many lands with all the
significations except that of "wife." It is proper here to mention
that the suggestion of several correspondents that the Indian sign as
applied to "wife" refers to "lying together" is rendered improbable
by the fact that when the same tribes desire to express the sexual
relation of marriage it is gestured otherwise. Many signs but little
differentiated were unstable, while others that have proved the best
modes of expression have survived as definite and established. Their
prevalence and permanence being mainly determined by the experience of
their utility, it would be highly interesting to ascertain how long a
time was required for a distinctly new conception or execution to gain
currency, become "the fashion," so to speak, over a large part of the
continent, and to be supplanted by a new "mode." A note may be made in
this connection of the large number of diverse signs for _horse_, all
of which must have been invented within a comparatively recent period,
and the small variation in the signs for _dog_, which are probably
ancient.

SURVIVAL IN GESTURE.

Even when the specific practice of sign language has been generally
discontinued for more than one generation, either from the adoption
of a jargon or from the common use of the tongue of the conquering
English, French, or Spanish, some of the gestures formerly employed
as substitutes for words may survive as a customary accompaniment to
oratory or impassioned conversation, and, when ascertained, should be
carefully noted. An example, among many, may be found in the fact
that the now civilized Muskoki or Creeks, as mentioned by Rev. H.F.
Buckner, when speaking of the height of children or women, illustrate
their words by holding their hands at the proper elevation, palm up;
but when describing the height of "soulless" animals or inanimate
objects, they hold the palm downward. This, when correlated with the
distinctive signs of other Indians, is an interesting case of the
survival of a practice which, so far as yet reported, the oldest men
of the tribe, now living only remember to have once existed. It is
probable that a collection of such distinctive gestures among the most
civilized Indians would reproduce enough of their ancient system to be
valuable, while possibly the persistent inquirer might in his search
discover some of its surviving custodians even among Chabta or
Cheroki, Innuit or Abnaki, Klamath or Nutka.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN IDENTITY OF SIGNS AND THEIR USE AS AN ART.

The general report that there is but one sign language in North
America, any deviation from which is either blunder, corruption, or a
dialect in the nature of provincialism, may be examined in reference
to some of the misconceived facts which gave it origin and credence.
It may not appear to be necessary that such examination should be
directed to any mode of collecting and comparing signs which would
amount to their distortion. It is useful, however, to explain that
distortion would result from following the views of a recent essayist,
who takes the ground that the description of signs should be made
according to a "mean" or average. There can be no philosophic
consideration of signs according to a "mean" of observations. The
proper object is to ascertain the radical or essential part as
distinct from any individual flourish or mannerism on the one hand,
and from a conventional or accidental abbreviation on the other; but
a mere average will not accomplish that object. If the hand, being
in any position whatever, is, according to five observations, moved
horizontally one foot to the right, and, according to five other
observations, moved one foot horizontally to the left, the "mean"
or resultant will be that it is stationary, which sign does not
correspond with any of the ten observations. So if six observations
give it a rapid motion of one foot to the right and five a rapid
motion of the same distance to the left, the mean or resultant would
be somewhat difficult to express, but perhaps would be a slow movement
to the right for an inch or two, having certainly no resemblance
either in essentials or accidents to any of the signs actually
observed. In like manner the tail of the written letter "_y_" (which,
regarding its mere formation, might be a graphic sign) may have in
the chirography of several persons various degrees of slope, may be
a straight line, or looped, and may be curved on either side; but a
"mean" taken from the several manuscripts would leave the unfortunate
letter without any tail whatever, or travestied as a "_u_" with an
amorphous flourish. A definition of the radical form of the letter or
sign by which it can be distinguished from any other letter or sign
is a very different proceeding. Therefore, if a "mean" or resultant of
any number of radically different signs to express the same object or
idea, observed either among several individuals of the same tribe or
among different tribes, is made to represent those signs, they are
all mutilated and ignored as distinctive signs, though the result may
possibly be made intelligible in practice, according to principles
mentioned in the present paper. The expedient of a "mean" may be
practically useful in the formation of a mere interpreter's jargon,
but it elucidates no principle. It is also convenient for any one
determined to argue for the uniformity of sign language as against the
variety in unity apparent in all the realms of nature. On the "mean"
principle, he only needs to take his two-foot rule and arithmetical
tables and make all signs his signs and his signs all signs. Of course
they are uniform, because he has made them so after the brutal example
of Procrustes.

In this connection it is proper to urge a warning that a mere sign
talker is often a bad authority upon principles and theories. He
may not be liable to the satirical compliment of Dickens's "brave
courier," who "understood all languages indifferently ill"; but many
men speak some one language fluently, and yet are wholly unable to
explain or analyze its words and forms so as to teach it to another
person, or even to give an intelligent summary or classification
of their own knowledge. What such a sign talker has learned is by
memorizing, as a child may learn English, and though both the sign
talker and the child may be able to give some separate items useful to
a philologist or foreigner, such items are spoiled when colored by the
attempt of ignorance to theorize. A German who has studied English
to thorough mastery, except in the mere facility of speech, may in
a discussion upon some of its principles be contradicted by any mere
English speaker, who insists upon his superior knowledge because he
actually speaks the language and his antagonist does not, but the
student will probably be correct and the talker wrong. It is an old
adage about oral speech that a man who understands but one language
understands none. The science of a sign talker possessed by a
restrictive theory is like that of Mirabeau, who was greater as an
orator than as a philologist, and who on a visit to England gravely
argued that there was something seriously wrong in the British mind
because the people would persist in saying "give me some bread"
instead of "_donnez-moi du pain_," which was so much easier and more
natural. A designedly ludicrous instance to the same effect was Hood's
arraignment of the French because they called their mothers "mares"
and their daughters "fillies." It is necessary to take with caution
any statement from a person who, having memorized or hashed up any
number of signs, large or small, has decided in his conceit that those
he uses are the only genuine Simon Pure, to be exclusively employed
according to his direction, all others being counterfeits or blunders.
His vocabulary has ceased to give the signs of any Indian or body of
Indians whatever, but becomes his own, the proprietorship of which he
fights for as if secured by letters-patent. When a sign is contributed
by one of the present collaborators, which such a sign talker has not
before seen or heard of, he will at once condemn it as bad, just as a
United States Minister to Vienna, who had been nursed in the mongrel
Dutch of Berks County, Pennsylvania, declared that the people of
Germany spoke very bad German.

An argument for the uniformity of the signs of our Indians is derived
from the fact that those used by any of them are generally understood
by others. But signs may be understood without being identical with
any before seen. The entribal as well as intertribal exercise of
Indians for generations in gesture language has naturally produced
great skill both in expression and reception, so as to render them
measurably independent of any prior mutual understanding, or what in
a system of signals is called preconcert. Two accomplished army
signalists can, after sufficient trial, communicate without having
any code in

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/17451