The Human Race
by Louis Figuier · English · Gutenberg #41849 · 862,982 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Human Race
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: The Human Race
Author: Louis Figuier
Release date: January 15, 2013 [eBook #41849]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/41849
Credits: Produced by Chris Curnow, Harry Lamé and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE HUMAN RACE ***
Transcriber’s Notes:
Text in italics in the original work has been transcribed between
underscores, as in _text_. Text printed in small capitals in the
original work has been transcribed in ALL CAPITALS. Superscript
letters have been transcribed as ^{x} for supersctipt x.
Depending on the hard- and software used, not all characters and
symbols used in this text may display properly.
More Transcriber’s Notes may be found at the end of this text.
THE
HUMAN RACE.
[Illustration:
_P. Sellier, p.^{t}_
_Imp. Dupuy, 22, R. des Petits Hôtels_
_G. Regamey, lith._
NORTH AMERICAN INDIAN
SOUTH AMERICAN INDIAN
RED RACE]
THE
HUMAN RACE.
BY
LOUIS FIGUIER.
ILLUSTRATED BY
TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY-THREE ENGRAVINGS ON WOOD,
AND EIGHT CHROMOLITHOGRAPHS.
NEW YORK:
D. APPLETON AND CO., BROADWAY.
1872.
LONDON:
BRADBURY, EVANS, AND CO., PRINTERS, WHITEFRIARS.
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION.
PAGE
CHAPTER I.--Definition of Man--How he differs from other Animals--
Origin of Man--In what parts of the Earth did he first appear?--Unity
of Mankind, evidence in support--What is understood by species in
Natural History--Man forms but one species, with its varieties or
kinds--Classification of the Human Race 1
CHAPTER II.--General characteristics of the human race--Organic
characteristics--Senses and the nervous system--Height--Skeleton--
Cranium and face--Colour of the skin--Physiological functions--
Intellectual characteristics--Properties of human intelligence--
Languages and literature--Different states of society--Primitive
industry--The two ages of prehistoric humanity 21
THE WHITE RACE.
CHAPTER I.
EUROPEAN BRANCH 41
TEUTONIC FAMILY 41
LATIN FAMILY 66
SLAVONIAN FAMILY 113
GREEK FAMILY 149
CHAPTER II.
ARAMEAN BRANCH 163
LIBYAN FAMILY 163
SEMITIC FAMILY 183
PERSIAN FAMILY 190
GEORGIAN FAMILY 203
CIRCASSIAN FAMILY 203
THE YELLOW RACE.
CHAPTER I.
HYPERBOREAN BRANCH 206
LAPP FAMILY 206
SAMOIEDE FAMILY 209
KAMTSCHADALE FAMILY 209
ESQUIMAUX FAMILY 211
TEMISIAN FAMILY 217
JUKAGHIRITE AND KORIAK FAMILIES 217
CHAPTER II.
MONGOLIAN BRANCH 218
MONGOL FAMILY 218
TUNGUSIAN FAMILY 223
YAKUT FAMILY 223
TURKISH FAMILY 229
CHAPTER III.
SINAIC BRANCH 254
CHINESE FAMILY 256
JAPANESE FAMILY 302
INDO-CHINESE FAMILY 324
THE BROWN RACE.
CHAPTER I.
HINDOO BRANCH 336
HINDOO FAMILY 339
MALABAR FAMILY 354
CHAPTER II.
ETHIOPIAN BRANCH 355
ABYSSINIAN FAMILY 355
FELLAN FAMILY 363
CHAPTER III.
MALAY BRANCH 365
MALAY FAMILY 365
POLYNESIAN FAMILY 380
MICRONESIAN FAMILY 400
THE RED RACE.
CHAPTER I.
SOUTHERN BRANCH 407
ANDIAN FAMILY 407
PAMPEAN FAMILY 419
GUARANY FAMILY 433
CHAPTER II.
NORTHERN BRANCH 452
SOUTHERN FAMILY 452
NORTH-EASTERN FAMILY 460
NORTH-WESTERN FAMILY 492
THE BLACK RACE.
CHAPTER I.
WESTERN BRANCH 495
CAFFRE FAMILY 495
HOTTENTOT FAMILY 498
NEGRO FAMILY 500
CHAPTER II.
EASTERN BRANCH 518
PAPUAN FAMILY 518
ANDAMAN FAMILY 531
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
RED RACE: NORTH AMERICAN INDIAN, SOUTH AMERICAN INDIAN
THE WHITE RACE.
FIG. PAGE
1.--MEN AND WOMEN OF ANATOLIA 5
2.--SAMOIEDES OF THE NORTH CAPE 7
WHITE OR CAUCASIAN RACE: SCANDINAVIAN, GREEK
3.--WAKE OF ICELANDIC PEASANTS IN A BARN 42
4.--WOMEN OF STAVANGER, NORWAY 43
5.--CITIZEN OF STAVANGER 44
6.--COSTUMES OF THE TELEMARK (NORWAY) 45
7.--WOMEN OF CHRISTIANSUND (NORWAY) 46
8.--BOY AND GIRL OF THE LAWERGRAND (NORWAY) 47
9, 10.--SUABIANS (STUTTGARD) 48
11, 12.--SUABIANS (STUTTGARD) 50
13.--BAVARIANS 52
14.--BADENERS 53
15.--ENGLISHMAN 63
16.--DRUIDS, GAULS, AND FRANKS 70
17.--FRENCHMAN 75
18.--CATTLE-DEALER OF CORDOVA 81
19.--NATIVES OF TOLEDO 83
20.--SPANISH PEASANT 84
21.--A MADRID WINE-SHOP 85
22.--SPANISH LADY AND DUENNA 88
23.--THE FANDANGO 89
24.--THE BOLERO 91
25.--FISH VENDORS AT OPORTO 92
26.--ROMAN PEASANT GIRL 94
27.--ROMAN PEASANTS 95
28.--YOUNG GIRL OF THE TRANSTEVERA 96
29.--STREET AT TIVOLI 98
30.--A CARDINAL ENTERING THE VATICAN 99
31.--EXALTATION OF POPE PIUS IX. 100
32.--A MACARONI SHOP AT NAPLES 103
33.--NEAPOLITAN ICED-WATER SELLER 104
34.--NEAPOLITAN PEASANT WOMAN 104
35.--ITINERANT TRADER OF NAPLES 105
36.--AN ACQUAJOLO, AT NAPLES 106
37.--WALACHIAN 108
38.--LADY OF BUCHAREST 110
39.--WALACHIAN WOMAN 111
40.--NOBLE BOSNIAK MUSSULMAN 112
41.--RUSSIAN SENTINEL, RIGA 115
42.--RUSSIAN DEVOTEES, RIGA 117
43.--TRAFFIC IN ST. PETERSBURG 121
44.--A RUSSIAN TAVERN 122
45.--INTERIOR OF AN ISBA 123
46.--LIVONIAN PEASANTS 124
47.--TARTAR OF KASAK 125
48.--TARTAR OF THE CAUCASUS 126
49.--TARTAR OF THE CAUCASUS 127
50.--RUSSIAN NORTH-SEA PILOT 128
51.--OSTIAK HUT 130
52.--ISIGANE OF VOAKOVAR 131
53.--SLAVONIAN PEASANT 132
54.--A PEASANT OF ESSEK 133
55.--HERDSMEN OF THE MILITARY CONFINES 135
56.--WOMAN OF THE MILITARY CONFINES 136
57.--GRÄNZERS, AND THEIR GUARD-HOUSE 138
58.--TSIGANE PRISONER 139
59.--BOSNIAK PEASANT 142
60.--BOSNIAK PEASANT WOMAN 143
61.--BOSNIAK MERCHANT 144
62.--WOMEN OF PESTH 145
63.--HUNGARIANS 146
64.--A HUNGARIAN GENTLEMAN 147
65.--HUNGARIANS 148
66.--GREEKS OF ATHENS 151
67.--A GREEK HOUSEHOLD 153
68.--INTERIOR OF THE AGORA AT ATHENS 156
69.--FÊTE OF THE TEMPLE OF JUPITER, ATHENS 159
WHITE OR CAUCASIAN RACE: GEORGEAN, ARAB
70.--ALBANIAN WOMAN 161
PORTRAIT OF AN ARMENIAN
71.--MOORISH COFFEE-HOUSE AT SIDI-BOW-SAID, NEAR TUNIS 164
72.--GRINDING WHEAT IN THE KABYLIA 169
73.--KABYLE JEWELLERS 171
74.--KOPTS OF THE TEMPLE OF KRANAH 175
75.--A FELLAH WOMAN AND CHILDREN 177
76.--A FELLAH DONKEY BOY 178
77.--A LADY OF CAIRO 181
78.--ALMA OR DANCING GIRL 182
79.--WANDERING ARABS 185
80.--JEW OF BUCHAREST 186
81.--BEYROUT 187
82.--MARONITES OF LIBANUS 189
83.--HADY-MERZA-AGHAZZI 192
84.--PERSIAN TYPES 194
85.--PERSIAN NOBLEMEN 195
86.--PERSIAN WOMEN 196
87.--LOUTY AND BAKTYAN 197
88.--AN ARMENIAN DRAWING-ROOM 200
89.--GEORGIANS 202
THE YELLOW RACE.
90.--LAPLANDERS 207
91.--A LAPP CRADLE 209
92.--SAMOIEDES 210
93.--ESQUIMAUX SUMMER ENCAMPMENT 212
94.--ESQUIMAUX WINTER ENCAMPMENT 213
95.--ESQUIMAUX VILLAGE 214
96.--ESQUIMAUX CHIEF 215
97.--ESQUIMAUX BIRD-CATCHER 216
98.--YOUNG ESQUIMAUX 217
99.--A MONGOL TARTAR 219
100.--BURÏATS ESCORTING MISS CHRISTIANI 222
101.--MANCHÚS SOLDIERS 224
YELLOW OR MONGOLIAN RACE: MONGOLIAN, ESQUIMAUX
102.--YAKUTS 225
103.--A YAKUT WOMAN 227
104.--YAKUT VILLAGERS 230
105.--YAKUT PRIESTS 231
106.--TURCOMAN ENCAMPMENT 234
107.--KIRGHIS FUNERAL RITES 237
108.--A HAREM 241
109.--A HAREM SUPPER 243
110.--TURKISH LADIES VISITING 245
111.--A TURKISH BARBER 249
112.--TURKISH PORTER 251
113.--INDO-CHINESE OF STUNG TRENG 254
114.--INDO-CHINESE OF LAOS 255
115.--A YOUNG CHINESE 257
116.--CHINESE SHOPKEEPER 258
117.--CHINESE LADY 259
118.--CHINESE WOMAN 260
119.--MANDARIN’S DAUGHTER 261
120.--CHINESE BOUDOIR 264
121.--CHINESE SITTING-ROOM 269
122.--OPIUM-SMOKERS 271
123.--CHINESE AGRICULTURE 273
124.--CHINESE FISHING 275
125.--THE CUSTOM-HOUSE AT SHANGHAI 277
YELLOW OR MONGOLIAN RACE: JAPANESE, CHINESE
126.--CHINESE BONZE 281
127.--CHINESE SCHOOLMASTER 283
128.--CHINESE LOCOMOTION 285
129.--A CHINESE PLAY 289
130.--A CHINESE JUNK 291
131.--CHINESE BEGGARS 293
132.--CHINESE PUNISHMENTS 295
133.--CHINESE PUNISHMENTS 296
134.--A CHINESE COURT OF JUSTICE 297
135.--CHINESE SOLDIERS 299
136.--CHINESE TROOPER 300
137.--THE GREAT WALL OF CHINA 301
138.--JAPANESE 304
139.--A JAPANESE FATHER 305
140.--JAPANESE SOLDIER 306
141.--JAPANESE NOBLE 307
142.--JAPANESE PALANQUIN 311
143.--THE TAÏCOON’S GUARDS 315
144.--A LADY OF THE COURT 317
145.--A KAMIS TEMPLE, JAPAN 321
146.--JAPANESE PAGODA 323
147.--BURMESE NOBLES 325
148.--BURMESE LADY 326
149.--WOMEN OF BANKOK 327
150.--SIAMESE DOMESTIC 328
151.--SIAMESE LADIES DINING 329
152.--TOMB OF A BONZE, AT LAOS 330
153.--CAMBODIANS 331
154.--THE PRINCE-ROYAL OF SIAM 333
155.--CHINESE GIRL 334
THE BROWN RACE.
156.--NATIVES OF HYDERABAD 337
157.--A BANIAN OF SURAT 338
158.--AN AGED SIKH 339
159.--A PARSEE GENTLEMAN 341
160.--SIR SALAR JUNG, K.S.I. 343
161.--NAUTCH GIRL OF BARODA 345
162.--A COOLIE OF THE GHATS 347
163.--PAGODA AT SIRRHINGHAM 349
164.--PALANQUIN 352
165.--ABYSSINIAN 355
166.--NOUERS OF THE WHITE NILE 356
167.--A NOUER CHIEF 358
168.--CHIEF OF THE LIRA 359
169.--MALAY “RUNNING A MUCK” 367
170.--MALAY 369
171.--JAVANESE 369
172.--JAVANESE DANCING GIRLS 371
173.--JAVANESE WEDDING 372
174.--DYAKS 377
175.--A DYAK HUT 379
176.--NEW ZEALAND CHIEF 383
177.--NATIVE OF TAHITI 393
178.--NATIVE OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS 398
THE RED RACE.
179.--HUASCAR, THIRTEENTH EMPEROR OF THE INCAS 408
180.--COYA CAHUANA, EMPRESS OF THE INCAS 409
181.--AN ANTIS INDIAN 411
182.--AN ANTIS INDIAN 412
183.--SUMMER SHED OF THE ANTIS 413
184.--ANTIS INDIANS FISHING 414
185.--PERUVIAN INTERPRETER 415
186.--ARAUCANIAN 417
187.--PECHERAY HUTS 418
188.--PATAGONIAN 422
189.--A PATAGONIAN HORSE SACRIFICE 423
190.--A BOLIVIAN CHIEF 426
191.--A BOAT ON THE RIO NEGRO 429
192.--EXAMINADOR OF CHILI 432
193.--A PARAGUAYAN MESSENGER 437
194.--BRAZILIAN NEGRO 440
195.--INDIAN WOMAN OF BRAZIL 441
196.--NATIVE OF MANAOS, BRAZIL 443
197.--BRAZILIAN NEGRESSES 445
198.--BRAZILIAN DWELLING 446
199.--NEGROS OF BAHIA 447
200.--NATIVES OF FRENCH GUYANA 449
201.--BOTOCUDOS 451
202.--INDIAN OF THE MEXICAN COAST 453
203, 204.--INDIANS OF THE MEXICAN COAST 454
205.--MEXICAN INDIAN WOMAN 456
206.--MEXICAN PICADOR 457
207.--THE ROLDAU BRIDGE MARKET, MEXICO 458
208.--MEXICAN HATTER 459
209.--MEXICAN HAWKER 459
210.--CREEK INDIANS 463
211.--ENCAMPMENT OF SIOUX INDIANS 465
212.--SIOUX WARRIOR 466
213.--A SIOUX CHIEF 467
214.--CROW INDIANS IN COUNCIL 470
215.--PAWNEE INDIANS 473
216.--A CHAYENE (SHIENNES) CHIEF 475
217.--A YUTE CHIEF 477
218.--CHOCTAW INDIANS PLAYING BALL 479
219.--COMANCHE INDIANS 481
220.--A COMANCHE CAMP 482
221.--A BUFFALO HUNT 483
222.--MOHAWK INDIANS 485
223.--FLAT-HEAD INDIANS 487
224.--NAYA INDIANS 489
225.--A CROW CHIEF 491
THE BLACK RACE.
226.--A CAFFRE 496
227.--NATIVE OF THE MOZAMBIQUE COAST 497
228.--THE HOTTENTOT VENUS 499
229.--A ZANZIBAR NEGRO 503
230.--ZANZIBAR NEGRESSES 507
231.--A NEGRO VILLAGE 511
232.--FISHING ON THE UPPER SENEGAL 513
233.--A ZAMBESI NEGRESS 515
BLACK RACE: PAPOUAN, NEGRO OF NEW GUINEA
234.--THAKOMBAU, KING OF THE FIJI ISLANDS 520
235.--NATIVE OF FIJI 521
236.--NATIVE OF FIJI 522
237.--A TEMPLE OF CANNIBALISM 523
238.--A FIJIAN DANCE 525
239.--YOUNG NATIVE OF NEW CALEDONIA 527
240.--NATIVE OF NEW CALEDONIA 529
241.--ENCAMPMENT OF NATIVE AUSTRALIANS 533
242.--NATIVE AUSTRALIAN 535
243.--AN AUSTRALIAN GRAVE 536
THE HUMAN RACE.
INTRODUCTION.
CHAPTER I.
Definition of Man--How he differs from other Animals--Origin of
Man--In what parts of the Earth did he first appear?--Unity of
Mankind, evidence in support--What is understood by species in
Natural History--Man forms but one species, with its varieties or
kinds--Classification of the Human Race.
What is man? A profound thinker, Cardinal de Bonald, has said: “Man is
an intelligence assisted by organs.” We would fain adopt this
definition, which brings into relief the true attribute of man,
intelligence, were it not defective in drawing no sufficient distinction
between man and the brute. It is a fact that animals are intelligent and
that their intelligence is assisted by organs. But their intelligence is
infinitely inferior to that of man. It does not extend beyond the
necessities of attack and defence, the power of seeking food, and a
small number of affections or passions, whose very limited scope merely
extends to material wants. With man, on the other hand, intelligence is
of a high order, although its range is limited, and it is often
arrested, powerless and mute, before the problems itself proposes. In
bodily formation, man is an animal, he lives in a material envelope, of
which the structure is that of the Mammalia; but he far surpasses the
animal in the extent of his intellectual faculties. The definition of
man must therefore establish this relation which animals bear to
ourselves, and indicate, if possible, the degree which separates them.
For this reason we shall define man: _an organized, intelligent being,
endowed with the faculty of abstraction_.
To give beyond this a perfectly satisfactory definition of man is
impossible: first, because, a definition, being but the expression of a
theory, which rarely commands universal assent, is liable to be rejected
with the theory itself; and secondly, because a perfectly accurate
definition supposes an absolute knowledge of the subject, of which
absolute knowledge our understanding is incapable. It has been well said
that a correct definition can be furnished by none but divine power.
Nothing is more true than this, and were we able to give of our own
species a definition rigorously correct, we should indeed possess
absolute knowledge.
The trouble we have to define aright the being about to form the subject
of our investigation is but a forecast of the difficulties we shall meet
when we endeavour to reason upon and to classify man. He who ventures to
fathom the problems of human nature, physical, intellectual or moral, is
arrested at every step. Each moment he must confess his powerlessness to
solve the questions which arise, and at times is forced to content
himself with merely suggesting them. This can be explained. Man is the
last link of visible creation; with him closes the series of living
beings which we are permitted to contemplate. Beyond him there extends,
in a world hidden from our view, a train of beings of a new order,
endowed with faculties superior and inaccessible to our comprehension,
mysterious phalanxes, whose place of abode even is unknown to us, and
who, after us, form the next step in the infinite progression of living
creatures by whom the universe is peopled. Situate, as he is, on the
confines of this unknown world, on the very threshold of this domain,
which his eye, if not his thoughts may not penetrate, man shares to some
extent the attributes belonging to those beings who follow him in the
economy of nature. Doubtless, it is this which makes it so difficult for
us to comprehend the actual essence of man, his destiny, his origin and
his end.
These reflections have been called for in order to supply an explanation
of the frequent admissions of helplessness which we shall be obliged to
make in this cursory Introduction, when we investigate the origin of
man, the period of his first appearance on the globe, the unity or
division of our species, the classification of the human race, &c. If to
many of these questions we reply with doubt and uncertainty, the reader
must not lay the blame at the feet of science, but must search for the
cause in the impenetrable laws of nature.
And first, whence comes man? Wherefore does he exist? To this we can
make no reply, the problem is beyond the reach of human thought. But we
may at least enquire, since this question has been largely debated by
the learned, whether man was at once constituted such as he is, or
whether he originally existed in some other animal form, which has been
modified in its anatomical structure by time and circumstances. In other
words, is it true, as has been pretended by various of our
contemporaries, that man is the result of the organic improvement of a
particular race of apes, which race forms a link between the apes with
which we are familiar and the first man?
We have already treated and discussed this question more fully in the
volume which preceded this. We have shown, in “Primitive Man,” that man
is not derived, by a process of organic transformation, from any animal,
and that he includes the ape not more than the whale among his ancestry;
but that he is the product of a special creation.
Nevertheless, whether its creation be special or the result of
modification, the human species has not always existed. There is, then,
a first cause for its production. What is this? Here is again a problem
which surpasses our understanding. Let us say, my readers, that the
creation of the human species was an act of God, that man is one of the
children of the great arbiter of the universe, and we shall have given
to this question the only response which can content at once our
feelings and our reason.
But let us summon questions more accessible to our comprehension, with
which the mind is more at ease, and upon which science can exercise its
functions. To what period should we refer the first appearance of man
upon the globe? In “Primitive Man” we have answered this question as far
as it can be. We have considered the opinion of some writers who carry
the first appearance of man as far back as the tertiary period.
Rejecting this date on account of the insufficiency of the evidence
produced, we, in common with most naturalists, have admitted, that man
appeared for the first time upon our globe at the commencement of the
quaternary period, that is to say, before the geological phenomenon of
the deluge and previous to the glacial period which preceded this great
terrestrial cataclysm. To fix the birth of man in the tertiary period
would be to travel out of facts now within the ken of science, and to
substitute for observation, conjecture and hypothesis.
By saying that man appeared for the first time upon the globe at the
commencement of the quaternary period, we establish the fact, which is
agreeable to the cosmogony of Moses, that man was formed after the other
animals, and that by his advent he crowned the edifice of animal
creation.
At the quaternary period almost all the animals of our time had already
seen the light, and a certain number of animal species existed, which
were shortly to disappear. When man was created, the mammoth, the great
bear, the cave tiger, and the cervus megaceros, animals more bulky, more
robust and more agile than the corresponding species of our time, filled
the forests and peopled the plains. The first men were therefore
contemporary with the woolly elephant, the cave bear and tiger; they had
to contend with these savage phalanxes, as formidable in their number as
their strength. Nevertheless, in obedience to the laws of nature, these
animals were to disappear from the globe and give place to smaller or
different species, whilst man, persisting in the opposite direction,
increased and multiplied, as the Scripture has said, and gradually
spread into all inhabitable countries, taking possession of his empire
which daily increased with the progress of his intelligence.
In “Primitive Man” we have given the history of the first steps of
humanity.
We have traced the origin and progress of civilization, from the moment
when man was cast, feeble, wretched and naked, in the midst of a hostile
and savage brute population, to the day when his power, resting upon a
firm basis, changed little by little the face of the inhabited earth.
We shall not refer to this at greater length, since in “Primitive Man”
we have treated it fully, and in unison with the actual discoveries of
science. But there is a very different problem to the solution of
which we shall apply ourselves in the following pages. Did man see the
light at any one spot of the earth, and at that alone, and is it
possible to indicate the region which was, so to say, the cradle of
humanity? Or, are we to believe that, in the first instance, man
appeared in several places at the same time? That he was created and has
always remained in the very localities he now inhabits? That the Negro
was born in the burning regions of Central Africa, the Laplander or the
Mongolian in the cold regions to which he is now confined?
[Illustration: 1.--MEN AND WOMEN OF ANATOLIA.]
To this question a satisfactory reply can be given by reference to facts
furnished by natural history. But in seeking a triumph for our opinion
we shall have to combat the arguments of a hostile doctrine. As we said
in the early part of this Introduction, we must ever be prepared to
encounter difficulties, to dissipate uncertainties, and to vie with
other theories in each point of the history of humanity which we may
seek to fathom.
There is a school of philosophers who assert that man was manifold in
his creation, that each type of humanity originated in the region to
which it is now attached, and that it was not emigration followed by the
action of climate, circumstances, and customs which gave birth to the
different races of man.
This opinion has been upheld in a work by M. Georges Pouchet, son of the
well-known naturalist of Rouen. But, one has only to read his essay upon
_la pluralité des races humaines_, to be convinced that the author, like
others of his school, as ardent in demolition as powerless in
construction, having chosen to act the easy part of a critic, exhibits
unprecedented weakness when called upon to supply a system in the place
of that he contradicts.
If there existed several centres of human creation, they should be
indicated, and it should be shown that the men who dwell there
now-a-days have never been connected with other populations. M. Georges
Pouchet preserves prudent silence upon this question; he avoids defining
the locus of any one of these supposed multiple creations. Such a faulty
argument speaks volumes for the doctrine.
We, on our part, think that man had on the globe one centre of creation,
that, fixed in the first instance in a particular region, he has
radiated in every direction from that point, and by his wanderings
coupled with the rapid multiplication of his descendants, he has
ultimately peopled all the inhabitable regions of the earth.
In order to demonstrate the truth of this proposition, we will examine
what takes place in connection with other organized beings, that is to
say, with animals and plants, and then apply this class of facts to man:
this is observation and induction, the only logical process to which we
can here resort.
[Illustration: 2.--SAMOIEDES OF THE NORTH CAPE.]
And what do botanical and zoological geography teach? They show us that
plants and animals have each their native locality, from which they but
seldom depart, and that it would be impossible to cite any plant or
animal which lives indifferently in all countries of the globe, without
having been transported thither by human industry. The earth is, so to
speak, divided into a certain number of zones, which have their
particular vegetable and animal life. These are so many natural
provinces, all of small extent, which represent veritable centres of
creation. The cedar, peculiar to the mountains of Lebanon, existed in
this region alone before it was transported to other climates; and the
coffee-plant had grown only in Arabia, before it was acclimatized in
South America. We could quote the names of many vegetables whose natural
abode is very sharply defined, but these instances are sufficient to
exemplify the general rule of which we treat.
We need hardly say that animals, like plants, are attached to various
localities which they rarely quit with impunity, since they have not the
faculty of acclimatizing themselves at will. The elephant lives only in
India and in certain parts of Africa; the hippopotamus and giraffe in
other countries of the same continent; monkeys exist in very few
portions of the globe, and if we consider their different species, we
shall find that the place of abode of each species is very limited. For
instance, of the larger apes, the orang-outang is found only in Borneo
and Sumatra, and the gorilla in a small corner of Western Africa. Had
man originated in all those places where now his different races are
found, he would stand alone as an exception among organized beings.
Reasoning then by induction, that is, applying to man all that we
observe to obtain generally among beings living on the surface of the
globe, we come to the conclusion that the human species, in common with
every vegetable or animal species, had but one centre of creation.
Can we now extend our investigation and determine the particular spot of
the earth whence man first came? It is probable that man first saw the
day on the plains of Central Asia, and that it was from this point that
by degrees he spread over the whole earth. We shall proceed to state the
facts which support this opinion.
Around the central tableland of Asia, are found the three organic and
fundamental types of man, that is to say, the white, the yellow, and the
black. The black type has been somewhat scattered, although it is still
found in the south of Japan, in the Malay Peninsula, in the Andaman
Isles, and in the Philippines, at Formosa. The yellow type forms a large
portion of the actual population of Asia, and it is well-known whence
came those white hordes that invaded Europe at times prehistoric and in
more recent ages; those conquerors belonged to the Aryan or Persian
race, and they came from Central Asia. We shall see later on, that the
different languages of the globe resolve themselves into three
fundamental forms: _monosyllabic_ languages, in which each word contains
but one syllable; _agglutinative_ languages, in which the words are
connected; and _inflected_ languages, which are the same as those spoken
in Europe. Now, those three general forms of language are, at the
present day, to be met with around the central tableland of Asia. The
monosyllabic language is spoken throughout China and in the different
states connected with that empire. The agglutinative languages are
spoken to the north of this plain, and extend as far as Europe. And,
lastly, inflected languages are found in all that portion of Asia which
is occupied by the white race.
Around the central tableland of Asia, we thus find not only the three
fundamental types of the human species, but the three types of human
speech. Does not this, therefore, afford ground for presumption, if not
actual proof, that man first appeared in this very region which
Scripture assigns as the birthplace of the human race?
It is from this central tableland of Asia, radiating so to say, around
this point of origin, that Man has progressively occupied every part of
the earth.
Migration commenced at a very early period, the facility with which our
species becomes habituated to every climate and accommodates itself to
variations of temperature, taken in connection with the nomadic
character which distinguished primitive populations, explains to us the
displacement of the earlier inhabitants of the earth. Soon, means of
navigation, although rude, were added to the power of travelling by
land, and man passed from the continent to distant islands, and thus
peopled the archipelagos as well as the mainland. By means of transport,
effected in canoes formed from the trunks of trees barely hollowed out,
the archipelagos of the Indian Ocean, and finally Australia, were
gradually peopled.
The American continent formed no exception to this law of the invasion
of the globe by the emigration of human phalanxes. It is a matter of no
great difficulty to pass from Asia to America, across Behring’s Straits,
which are almost always covered with ice, thus permitting of almost a
dry passage from one continent to the other. Thus it is that the
inhabitants of Northern Asia have found their way into the north of the
New World.
This communication of one terrestrial hemisphere with the other is less
surprising when we consider what modern historical works have shown,
namely, that already about the tenth century, which would be nearly 400
years before Christopher Columbus, navigators from the coast of Norway
had penetrated to the other hemisphere. The inhabitants of Mexico and
Chili possess most authentic historical archives, which prove that a
most advanced civilization flourished there at an early period. Gigantic
monuments which still remain, bear witness to the great antiquity of the
civilization of the Incas (Peru) and of the Aztecs (Mexico). It is
reasonable to suppose that the inhabitants of America, who thus advanced
at a rapid pace in the path of civilization, descended from the hordes
of Northern Asia which reached the New World by traversing the ice of
Behring’s Straits.
To explain, therefore, the presence of man upon all parts of the
continent, and in the islands, it is not necessary to insist upon the
existence of several centres, where our species was created. If popular
traditions went to show that all the regions now inhabited have always
been occupied by the same people, and that those who are found there
have constantly lived in the same places, there might be reason to admit
the hypothesis of multiple creations of the human race; but, on the
contrary, traditions for the most part teach us that each country has
been peopled progressively by means of conquest or emigration.
Tradition shows that the nomadic state of existence has universally
preceded fixed settlements. It is, therefore, probable that the first
men were constantly on the move. A flood of barbarians, coming from
central Asia, overflowed the Roman Empire, and the Vandals penetrated
even into Africa. Modern migrations have been conducted on a still
vaster scale, for at the present day we find America almost wholly
occupied by Europeans; English, Spanish and other people of the Latin
race fill the vast American hemisphere, and the primitive populations of
the New World have almost entirely disappeared, annihilated by the iron
yoke of the conqueror.
The continent of Asia was peopled little by little by branches of the
Aryan race, who came down from the plains of Central Asia, directing
their course towards India. As to Africa: that continent received its
contingent of population through the Isthmus of Suez, the valley of the
Nile, and the coasts of Arabia, by the aid of navigation.
There is therefore nothing to show that humanity had several distinct
nuclei. It is clear that man started from one point alone, and that
through his power of adapting himself to the most different climates, he
has, little by little, covered the whole face of the inhabitable earth.
The Bible proclaimed, long before the studies of modern anthropologists
made it known, this principle of the unity of the human species. In like
manner as the Bible opposed its monotheistic cosmogony to the different
cosmogonies of oriental or pagan antiquity, in like manner it opposes to
the erroneous dogmas of the religions and philosophies of antiquity,
this doctrine sublime and simple in itself, that man, the last child of
creation, rules it as its appointed head and by his moral power. Holy
Writ, indeed, says to us: “God has created the whole human race of one
flesh.”[1]
[1] St. Paul at the Areopagus of Athens. Acts of the Apostles, chap.
xvii. v. 26.
There is another problem. Did the white, the yellow, and the black man
exist from the first moment of the appearance of our species upon the
globe, or have we to explain the formation of these three fundamental
races by the action of climate, by any special form of nourishment, the
result of local resources; in other words, by the action of the soil, if
we may use the expression of a conscientious author, M. Trémaux?[2]
[2] Origine et transformation de l’homme et des autres êtres. 1 vol.
in 18. Paris, 1865.
Innumerable dissertations have been written with a view of explaining
the origin of these three races, and of connecting them with the climate
or the soil. But it must be admitted that the problem is hardly capable
of solution. The influence which a warm climate exercises upon the
colour of the skin is a well known fact, and it is a matter of common
observation that the white European, if transported into the heart of
Africa, or carried to the coast of Guinea, transmits to his descendants
the brown colour which the skin of the Negro possesses, and that in
their turn the offspring of Negroes, who have been brought into northern
countries, become as they descend, paler and paler and end by being
white. But the colour of the skin is not the only characteristic of a
race; the Negro differs from the white, less by the colour of his skin,
than by the structure of the face and cranium, as also by the proportion
of his members to one another. Is it not, moreover, a fact that the
hottest countries are inhabited by people with white skins? Such for
instance are the Touaricks of the African Sahara, and the Fellahs of
Egypt. On the other hand, men with black faces are found in countries
enjoying a mean temperature, as for instance, the inhabitants of
California on the coast of the Pacific Ocean.
Let us conclude that science is unable to explain to us the difference
which exists between the different types of the human species, that
neither the temperature nor the action of the soil furnish an
explanation of this fact, and that we must limit ourselves to noting it,
without further comment, in spite of the mania which prompts the savants
of our day in a desire to explain everything.
We have now another question to consider. Should these white, yellow, or
black men, to whom we must add, as we shall see later on, those who are
brown and red, all of whom differ one from another in the colour of
their skin, in height, in their physiognomy, and in their outward
appearance, be grouped into different species, or are we to regard them
merely as varieties of species--that is to say, _races_? To fully
understand this question and to form a judgment of what will result from
it, we must ascertain what is understood in natural history by the word
_species_, and by the word _race_ or _variety of species_. We will
therefore commence by explaining the meaning of species in zoology.
The hare and the rabbit, the horse and the ass, the dog and the wolf,
the stag and the reindeer, &c., are not likely to be taken one for
another. Yet how greatly do dogs differ among themselves in size, in
colour, and in their proportions. What a difference there is between the
mastiff and the Pyrenean dog! The same observation applies to horses.
How different we find in size and outward appearance the large Normandy
horse, the London dray horse, or the omnibus horse of Paris, and the
small Corsican or Shetland horses which we can carry in our arms! And
yet no one is mistaken in them: whether he differ in size, or in the
colour of his hair, we always recognise a horse, and never mistake him
for an ass; in the mastiff as well as in the bulldog, we shall always
recognise a dog. However greatly a rabbit may vary in size and colour,
it will never be taken for a hare. The Breton cow, slight and frail, is
nevertheless as much a cow in the eyes of a farmer, and the rest of the
world, as a full-sized Durham. The same reflection applies with equal
force to birds. The turkey which exists in the wild state in America,
certainly differs very much from the black or white turkey acclimatized
in Europe; but there is no mistake that both of them are turkeys, and
nothing else.
The vegetable kingdom will furnish us with similar facts. Take, for
instance, the cotton plant on its native soil in America, and you will
find that it differs from the cotton plant cultivated in Africa and
Asia. The coffee plant of the South American plantations is not similar
to the same shrub which exists in Arabia, whence it came in the first
instance. Wheat varies with latitude to a most extraordinary extent, &c.
The cotton plant, however, is always the cotton plant, whatever be the
soil upon which it grows; the coffee plant and wheat are always the same
vegetables, and one is not liable to be deceived in them. The action of
climate and soil upon vegetables, these same causes taken in connection
with nutrition upon animals, and finally the mixture which has taken
place between different individuals, explain all these differences,
which affect the external appearance, but not the type itself.
We mean by _species_, when applied either to animals or vegetables, the
fundamental type, and by _variety_ or _race_ the different beings which
result from the influence of climate, of nutriment, and of mixture with
individuals of the same species. The _species dog_ gives birth to the
_varieties_ or _races_ known under the names of bull-dog, spaniel,
mastiff, &c. The _species horse_ gives birth to the _races_ or
_varieties_ known under the names of the Arabian, English, Normandy,
Corsican, &c. The _species turkey_ produces the varieties known as the
wild turkey, the black and the white turkey. In the vegetable kingdom,
the _cotton plant species_ produces the American and the Indian cotton;
the _bramble_ produces the innumerable varieties which are known to us
as rose-trees.
But, the reader will say, how are we to distinguish race from species,
and does there exist any practical means of deciding whether the animal
under consideration belongs to a species or a race? We reply that such a
means does exist, which enables us to speak with certainty in every
case. It is of importance that this should be made known in order that
every one may test it for himself.
Take the two animals in question, unite them, and if that connexion of
the sexes results in the production of another individual, capable of
reproduction, this will indicate race or variety. If, however, the union
of the two individuals is unproductive, or the offspring is itself
barren, this will indicate two individuals of different species.
In spite of observations and experiments made in the course of many
thousand years, reproduction has never been procured by mixture of a
rabbit with a hare, a wolf with a dog, a sheep with a goat. It is true
that hybrids are obtained between the horse and she-ass, and between the
ass and the mare, but it is well known that the individuals produced by
this mixture, namely, the quadrupeds termed _mules_, are barren animals,
incapable of reproduction with one another.
This rule is not confined to the animal kingdom, but it obtains also
among vegetables. You can obtain artificial production from a pear tree
by applying, with suitable precautions, the pollen of the flowers of one
pear tree to the stamens of those of another. Fruit will be formed, and
the seed which that produces will in its turn be productive. But if you
attempt to perform the same operation between a pear tree and an apple
tree, you will obtain no result whatever. This, again, is the practical
method which enables botanists to distinguish varieties from species.
The test of artificial fecundation between one plant and another, which
it is desired to distinguish as regards their species, serves to solve
the difficulties which are met in attempting to determine the position
of a plant in botanical classification.
The word _species_ therefore is not a fictitious term, a conventional
expression invented by the learned to designate the classifications of
living beings. A species is a group arranged by Nature herself.
Fruitfulness or barrenness in the products of the mixture are the
characteristics which Nature attaches to variety or to species; those
groups therefore appear to us as though they had a substantial
foundation in the laws which govern living beings, and we do but render
in speech what we observe in Nature.
When, moreover, we reflect, we easily understand that if Nature had not
instituted species the most complete disorder would have reigned
throughout living creation. By intermixture the animal kingdom would
have been overrun by _mongrels_ who would have confused every type, thus
permitting of no discernment in this crowd of incoherent products. The
whole animal kingdom would have been given over to inextricable
confusion. In like manner, if plants had been capable of infinite
variety through the mixture of different species, brought about by the
industry of man, or by the effect of the wind bearing through the air
the fertilizing pollen, there would be nought but trouble and disorder
among the vegetable population of the globe.
Species therefore has a necessary, providential, and fixed existence.
Impossibility of union is the distinctive qualification which nature
assigns to this group of living beings. Reproduction is possible only
between members of the same species, and the differences produced in
their offspring by the soil, nutriment and surrounding circumstances,
determine what we call race, or variety.
The principle which we have just enunciated, will in its application to
man enable us to decide whether the individuals that people the globe,
belong to different species of men, or simply to _races_ or _varieties_;
in other words, whether the human species is unique, and whether the
different human types known to us, the white, black, yellow, brown and
red-man, belong or not to _races_ of the human species.
The reply to this question will doubtless have been anticipated. If we
apply the rule stated above, all men that inhabit the globe belong to
one and the same species, since it is a fact that men and women,
whatever be their colour, can marry, and their offspring is always
reproductive. The Negro and white female by their union produce
mulattoes; mulattoes and mulattresses are reproductive, as are also
their descendants--marriages between members of the red or brown races
are fruitful, and, what is more, the fecundity of the descendants of
mongrels is superior to that of men and women of the same colour.
Unless, therefore, we regard men as a solitary exception among all
living beings, unless we withdraw them from the operation of the
universal laws of nature, we must come to the conclusion that they do
but form a certain number of races of one and the same species, and all
descend from one primitive unique species.
Men are brothers in blood: this principle of universal fraternity
imposed by nature, may be placed side by side with the corresponding
maxim suggested by the moral sense.
Those who deny the unity of the human species, _polygenists_, or
supporters of the plurality of human kind, base their arguments in
favour of there being more than one species, upon the assertion that the
distinction between the Negro and the white man is too great to permit
of their possibly being classed together. But, between the lap-dog and
the mastiff, the wild and tame rabbit, the spaniel and the greyhound, or
the Shetland and Russian horse, there is a much greater difference than
exists between the Negro and the white man. We are unable to state
exactly, or to explain with any degree of accuracy, how it is that man,
as he was first created, has given birth to races so widely different as
the white, black, yellow, brown, and red which people the earth at the
present day. We can but furnish a general explanation of what we see in
the widely varying conditions of existence, and in the opposite
character of the media through which man, for ages past, has dragged his
existence, frequently with much difficulty and uncertainty. If the dog,
the horse, the rabbit, and the turkey, through the agency of human
industry applied to them during a period of scarcely two thousand years,
have given birth to so many varieties, how much more would man, whose
appearance upon the globe is of such antiquity that we cannot assign to
it even approximatively a date--man, whose fate it has been to pass
through so many different climates, such various physical and social
positions, expect to see his own type become modified and transformed?
We should, with more reason, feel surprised at finding that the
differences between one variety and another are not much wider than they
appear to be.
In order to avoid this argument, there remains to the supporters of the
plurality of human kind no alternative but to regard man as an exception
in nature; to assert that he has laws peculiar to himself, and that the
principles which pervade the life of plants and animals can in no way
apply to him. But man, who is an organized and living being, and is
furnished with a body that differs but little from that of any
mammiferous animal, is, so far as concerns his organization, subject to
the universal laws of nature, and that of intermixture among the rest.
It is therefore impossible to admit the question of exception raised by
those who deny the unity of the human species.
The principle that the human species is one, and what follows as a
natural conclusion, namely, that all men who inhabit the earth are but
races or varieties of this one species, will, therefore, appear to the
reader to be satisfactorily established.
* * * * *
These different races which originate in one species, the primitive type
having been modified by the operation of climate, food, soil,
intermixture and local customs, differ, it must be admitted, to a
marvellous extent, in their outward appearance, colour and physiognomy.
The differences are so great, the extremes so marked and the transitions
so gradual, that it is well-nigh impossible to distribute the human
species into really natural groups from a scientific point of view, that
is to say, groups founded upon organic characteristics. The
classification of the human races has always been the stumbling block of
anthropology, and up to the present time the difficulty remains almost
undiminished.
A cursory examination of the various classifications which have been
brought forward by the most important of those who have essayed the task
will make this truth apparent to all.
Buffon, in his chapter upon _man_; a work which we can always read again
with admiration and advantage, contents himself with bringing forward
the three fundamental types of the human species which have been known
from the first under the names of the white, black and yellow race. But
these three types in themselves do not exemplify every human
physiognomy. The ancient inhabitants of America, commonly known as the
_Red-Skins_, are entirely overlooked in this classification, and the
distinction between the Negro and the white man cannot always be easily
pointed out, for in Africa the Abyssinians, the Egyptians, and many
others, in America the Californians, and in Asia the Hindoos, Malays and
Javanese are neither white nor black.
Blumenbach, the most profound anthropologist of the last century, and
author of the first actual treatise upon the natural history of man,
distinguished in his Latin work, _De Homine_, five races of men, the
Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, Malay and American. Another
anthropologist, Prochaska, adopted the divisions pointed out by
Blumenbach, but united under the name of the _white race_, Blumenbach’s
Caucasian and Mongolian groups, and added the _Hindoo race_.
The eloquent naturalist Lacépède, in his _Histoire naturelle de
l’Homme_, added to the races admitted by Blumenbach the _hyperborean
race_, comprising the inhabitants of the northern portion of the globe
in either continent.
Cuvier fell back upon Buffon’s division, admitting only the white, black
and yellow races, from which he simply derived the _Malay_ and
_American_ races.
A naturalist of renown, Virey, author of _l’Histoire naturelle du Genre
humain_, _l’Histoire naturelle de la Femme_, and of many other clever
productions upon natural history and particularly anthropology, gave
much attention to the classification of the human races. But he was not
favourable to the unity of our species, being led to entertain the
opinion that the human species was twofold. This was the starting point
of an erroneous deviation in the ideas of naturalists who wrote after
Virey. We find Bory de Saint Vincent admitting as many as fifteen
species of men, and another naturalist, Desmoulins, doubtless influenced
by a feeling of emulation, distinguished sixteen human species, which,
moreover, were not the same as those admitted by Bory de Saint Vincent.
This course of classification might have been followed to a much greater
extent, for the differences among men are so great, that if strict rule
is not adhered to, it is impossible to fix any limit to species. Unless
therefore the principle of unity has been fully conceded at starting,
the investigation may result in the admission of a truly indefinite
quantity.
This is the principle which pervades the writings of the most learned of
all the anthropologists of our age, Dr. Pritchard, author of a _Natural
History of Man_, which in the original text formed ten volumes, but of
which the French language possesses but a very incomplete translation.
Dr. Pritchard holds that all people of the earth belong to the same
species; he is a partisan of the unity of the human species, but is not
satisfied with any of the classifications already proposed, and which
were founded upon organic characteristics. He, in fact, entirely alters
the aspect of the ordinary classifications which are to be met with in
natural history. He commences by pointing out three families, which, he
asserts, were in history the first human occupants of the earth: namely
the _Aryan_, _Semitic_, and _Egyptian_. Having described these three
families, Pritchard passes to the people who, as he says, radiated in
various directions from the regions inhabited by them, and proceeded to
occupy the entire globe.
This mode of classification, as we have pointed out, leaves the beaten
track trodden by other natural historians. For this reason it has not
found favour among modern anthropologists, and this disfavour has
reacted upon the work itself, which, notwithstanding, is the most
complete and exact of all that we possess upon man. Although it has been
adopted by no other author, Pritchard’s classification of the human race
appears to us to be the most sound in principle.
M. de Quatrefages, in his course of anthropology at the Museum of
Natural History, Paris, makes a classification of the human race based
upon the three types, white, yellow and black; but he appends to each of
these three groups, under the head of _mixed races attached to each
stem_, a number of races more or less considerable and arbitrary which
were excluded from the three chief divisions.
The classification of M. de Quatrefages will be found in his _Rapport
sur les progrès de l’Anthropologie_, published in 1867.[3] It is
extremely learned and well worked out, but a classification which
entirely passes by the simple mode of reasoning we shall adopt in the
following pages.
[3] In 4º forming part of the _Rapports sur les progrès des Sciences
et des Lettres en France_, published under the auspices of the
Minister of Public Instruction.
The classification of the human race which we propose to follow,
modifying it where in our opinion it may appear to be necessary, is due
to a Belgian naturalist, M. d’Omalius d’Halloy. It acknowledges five
races of men: the white, black, yellow, brown and red.
This classification is based upon the colour of the skin, a
characteristic very secondary in importance to that of organization, but
which yet furnishes a convenient framework for an exact and methodical
enumeration of the inhabitants of the globe, permitting a clear
consideration of a most confused subject. In the groups, therefore,
which we shall propose, the reader will fail to find a truly scientific
classification, but will meet with merely such a simple distribution of
materials, as shall permit us to review methodically the various races
spread over every portion of the Earth’s surface.
CHAPTER II.
General characteristics of the human race--Organic characteristics--
Senses and the nervous system--Height--Skeleton--Cranium and face--
Colour of the skin--Physiological functions--Intellectual
characteristics--Properties of human intelligence--Languages and
literature--Different states of society--Primitive industry--The two
ages of prehistoric humanity.
Before entering upon a minute description of each of the human races, we
shall find it well to lay before the reader a generalization of the
characteristics which are common to all.
Since man is an intelligent being, living in an organized frame, our
attention has to be directed to the consideration of his organs and
intellect, that is, in the first place, we must investigate the
physical, in the second, the intellectual and moral elements of his
constitution.
The physical characteristics bear but secondary importance among those
of the human race. Man is a spirit which shines within the body of an
animal, and the only difficulty is to ascertain in what manner the
organism of the mammalia is modified in order to become that of man; to
compare the harmony of this organism with the object in view, namely the
exercise of human intellect and thought. We shall see that the organs of
the mammalia are greatly modified in the human subject, becoming, either
on account of their individual excellence or the harmony of their
combination, greatly superior to the associations of the same organs
among animals.
Let us first consider the brain and organs of sense. When we examine the
form and relative size of the brain in ascending the series of
mammiferous animals, we find that this organ increases in volume, and
progresses, so to say, toward the superior characteristics which it is
to display in the human species. Disregarding certain exceptions, for
the existence of which we cannot account, but which in no way alter the
general rule, the brain increases in importance from the zoophyte to the
ape. But, in comparing the brain of the ape with that of man, an
important difference becomes at once apparent. The brain of the gorilla,
orang-outang, or chimpanzee, which are the apes that bear the greatest
resemblance to man, and which for that reason are designated
_anthropomorphous_ apes, is very much smaller than that of man. The
cerebral lobes in man are much longer than in the anthropomorphous apes,
and their vertical measure is out of all proportion with the height of
the cerebral lobes in apes; this is what produces the noble frontal
curve, one of the characteristic features of the human physiognomy. The
cerebral lobes are connected behind with a third nervous mass called the
_cerebellum_. The large volume of these three lobes, the depth and
number of convolutions of the encephalic mass, and other anatomical
details of the brain, upon which we are unable here to treat at greater
length, place the brain of man very far above that of the animal nearest
to him in the zoological scale. These differences bear witness in favour
of man to an unparalleled intellectual development, and we should be
better able to measure these differences, were we able to show in what
the cerebral action consists, but this we are utterly unable to do.
The senses, taken individually, are not more developed in man than they
are in certain animals; but in man they are characterised by their
harmony, their perfect equilibrium, and their admirable appropriation to
a common end. Man, it will at once be admitted, is not so keen of sight
as the eagle, nor so subtle of hearing as the hare, nor does he possess
the wonderful scent of the dog. His skin is far from being as fine and
impressionable as that which covers the wing of a bat. But, while among
animals, one sense always predominates to the disadvantage of the rest,
and the individual is thus forced to adopt a mode of existence which
works hand in hand with the development of this sense, with man, all the
senses possess almost equal delicacy, and the harmony of their
association makes up for what may be wanting in individual power. Again,
the senses of animals are employed only in satisfying material
necessities, while in man, they assist in the exercise of eminent
faculties whose development they further.
Let us consider shortly in detail our senses.
Man is certainly better off, as regards the sense of sight, than a large
majority of animals. Instead of being placed upon different sides of his
head, looking in opposite directions, and receiving two images which
cannot possibly be alike, his eyes are directed forwards, and regard
similar objects, by which means the impression is doubled. The sense of
sight thus brings to his conceptions a complete image and solid idea of
what surrounds him; it is his most useful sense, the more so when it is
guided in its application by a clear intellect.
The sense of touch in man reaches a degree of perfection which it does
not attain in animals. How marvellous is the sense of touch when
exercised by applying the extremities of the fingers, the part of the
body the best suited to this function, and how much more wonderful is
the organ called the hand, which applies itself in so admirable a manner
to the most different surfaces whose extent, form, or qualities, we wish
to ascertain!
A modern philosopher has attributed to the hand alone our intellectual
superiority. This was going too far. We find enthusiasm allied with
justice in the views expressed in the excellent pages which Galen has
consecrated to a description of the hand, in his immortal work _De usu
partium_.
“Man alone,” says Galen, “is furnished with hands, as he alone is a
participator in wisdom. The hand is a most marvellous instrument, and
one most admirably adapted to his nature. Remove his hand, and man can
no longer exist. By its means he is prepared for defence or attack, for
peace or war. What need has he of horns or talons? With his hand, he
grasps the sword and lance, he fashions iron and steel. Whilst with
horns, teeth and talons, animals can only attack or defend at close
quarters, man is able to project from afar the instruments with which he
is armed. Shot from his hand, the feathered arrow reaches at a great
distance the heart of an enemy, or stops the flight of a passing bird.
Although man is less agile than the horse and the deer, yet he mounts
the horse, guides him, and thus successfully hunts the deer. He is
naked and feeble, yet his hand procures him a covering of iron and
steel. His body is unprotected against the inclemencies of climate, yet
his hand finds him a convenient abode, and furnishes him with clothing.
By the use of his hand, he gains dominion and mastery over all that
lives upon the earth, in the air, or in the depths of the sea. From the
flute and lyre with which he amuses his leisure, to the terrible
instruments by means of which he deals death around him, and to the
vessel which bears him, a daring seaman, upon the bosom of the deep--all
is the work of his hand.
“Would man without hands have been able to write out the laws which
govern him, or raise to the gods statues and altars? Without hands could
he bequeath to posterity the fruit of his labours, and the memory of his
deeds? Could he (had man been created handless) converse with Socrates,
Plato, Aristotle, and the different great men, children of bygone ages?
The hand is then the physical characteristic of man, in like manner as
intelligence is his moral characteristic.”
Galen, having shown in this chapter the general formation of the hand
and the special disposition of the organs which compose it; having
described the articulations and bones, the muscles and tendons of the
fingers; and having analyzed the mechanism of the different movements of
the hand, cries, full of admiration for this marvellous structure:
“In presence of the hand, this marvellous instrument, cannot we well
treat with contempt the opinion of those philosophers who saw in the
human body merely the result of a fortuitous concourse of atoms! Does
not everything in our organization most clearly give the lie to this
false doctrine? Who will dare to invoke chance in explanation of this
admirable disposition? No, it is no blind power that has given birth to
all these marvels. Do you know among men a genius capable of conceiving
and executing so perfect a work? There exists not such a workman. This
sublime organization is the creation of a superior intelligence, of
which the intellect of man is but a poor terrestrial reflection. Let
others offer to the Deity reeking hecatombs, let them sing hymns in
honour of the gods; my hymn of praise shall be the study and the
exposition of the marvels of the human frame!”
The sense of hearing, without attaining in man the perfection which it
reaches in certain animals, is nevertheless of great delicacy, and
becomes an infinite resource of instruction and pure enjoyment. Not only
are differences of intonation, intensity, and timbre, recognised by our
ear, but the most delicate shades of rhythm and tone, the relations of
simultaneous and successive sounds which give the sentiment of melody
and harmony, are appreciated, and furnish us with the first and most
natural of the arts--music. Thus the perfection and delicacy of our
senses, which permit of our grasping faint and slightly varying
impressions, the harmony of these senses themselves, their perfect
equilibrium, their capability of improvement by exercise, place us at a
considerable distance above the animal.
Let us now pass to the bony portion of the human body, and consider
first of all the head. The head is shared by two regions, the cranium
and the face. The predominance of either of these regions over the
other, depends upon the development of the organs which belong to each.
The cranium contains the cerebral mass, that is, the seat of the
intellect; the face is occupied by the organs appertaining to the
principal senses. In animals, the face greatly exceeds the cranium in
extent; the reverse is, however, the case with man. It is but rarely
that with him the face assumes importance at the expense of the
cranium--in other words, that the jaws become elongated, and give to the
human face the aspect of a brute.
We find in works upon anthropology some expressions which call for an
explanation here; they are frequently employed, since they enable us to
express by a single term the relation which exists between the
dimensions of any particular skull. The term _dolichocephalous_ (from
the Greek δολιχος, long, κεφαλη, head,) is applied to a cranium which is
elongated from front to rear, or, to express the idea numerically, the
cranium whose longitudinal diameter bears to its vertical diameter the
proportion of 100 to 68. A short cranium is styled _brachycephalous_
(from βραχυς, short, κεφαλη, head,) which term is applied when the
relation between the longitudinal and vertical diameters is 100 to 80.
The attribute of length or shortness of the cranium is of less
importance than is generally believed. All Negroes, it is true, are
_dolichocephalous_; but it must not be supposed from this that the
production backwards of the cranium is an indication of inferiority;
since in the white race, heads are sometimes very long and sometimes
very short. The North Germans are _dolichocephalous_; those inhabiting
Central Germany being _brachycephalous_. This characteristic cannot
therefore be regarded as a criterion of intellectual excellence.
There is in the human face an anatomical characteristic of greater
importance than any taken from the elongation of the cranium; that is,
the projection forwards, or the uprightness of the jaws. The term
_prognathism_ (from προ, forward, and γναθος, jaw,) is applied to this
jutting forward of the teeth and jaws, and _orthognathism_ (from ορθος,
straight, γναθος, jaw,) to the latter arrangement.
It was long admitted that prognathism, or projection of the jaws, was
peculiar to the Negro race. But this opinion has been forced to yield to
the discovery, that projecting jaws exist among people in no way
connected with the Negro. In the midst of white populations this
characteristic is frequently met with; it is occasionally found among
the English, and is by no means rare at Paris, especially among women.
Prognathism would appear to be characteristic of a small European race
dwelling to the south of the Baltic Sea, the Esthonians, and which
itself is but the residue of the _primitive Mongolian_ race to which we
have alluded in our work, “Primitive Man,” as being the first race
which, according to M. Pruner-Bey, peopled the globe. It is probably the
mixture of Esthonian blood with that of the inhabitants of Central
Europe, which causes the appearance in our large cities of individuals
whose faces are prognathous.
We cannot close our remarks upon the face without speaking of a curious
relation between it and the cranium, which has been much abused; we
allude to the _facial angle_. By _facial angle_ is meant the angle which
results from the union of two lines, one of which touches the forehead,
the other of which, drawn from the orifice of the ear, meets the former
line at the extremity of the front teeth.
The Dutch anatomist Camper, after having compared Greek and Roman
statues, or medals of either nationality, assumed that the cause of the
intellectual superiority which distinguished Greek from Roman
physiognomies was to be found in the fact, that, with the Greeks, the
facial angle is larger than in Roman heads. Starting with this
observation, Camper pursued his enquiries until it occurred to him to
advance the theory that the increase of the facial angle may be taken in
the human race as a sign of superior intelligence.
This observation was correct, insomuch as it separated men from apes,
and carrion birds from other birds. But its application to different
varieties of men, as a measure of their various degrees of intelligence,
was a pretension doomed to be sacrificed to future investigations. Dr.
Jacquart, assistant-naturalist in the Museum of Natural History at
Paris, calling to his aid an instrument he invented, by which the facial
angle is rapidly measured, has, in our day, made numerous studies of the
facial angle of human beings. M. Jacquart found that this angle cannot
be taken as a measure of intelligence, for he observed it to be a right
angle in individuals, who, with respect to intelligence, were in no way
superior to others whose facial angle was much smaller. M. Jacquart went
so far as to show, that, in the population of Paris alone, the facial
angle varies between much wider proportions than those imposed by Camper
as characteristic limits of human varieties.
The measure of the facial angle, therefore, is far from bearing the
importance which has long been ascribed to it; but this does not go to
prevent its application, with advantage, in ordinary cases, when races
of men are required to be distinguished from one another.
Erect carriage is another of the characteristics which distinguish the
human species from all other animals, including the ape, by whom this
position is but rarely assumed, and then accidentally and unnaturally.
Everything in the human skeleton is calculated to ensure a vertical
posture. In the first place, the head articulates with the vertebral
column at a point so situated that, when this vertebral column is erect,
the head, by means of its own weight, remains supported in equilibrium.
Besides this, the shape of the head, the direction of the face, the
position of the eyes, and the form of the nostrils, all require that man
should walk erect on two feet.
If our body were intended to assume a horizontal position, everything
connected with it would be out of place: the crown of the head would be
the most advanced part, and this would operate most detrimentally to the
exercise of sight; the eyes would be directed toward the earth; the
nostrils would open backward; the forehead and the face would be
beneath the head. Moreover, the whole muscular system and all the
tendons are, in man, auxiliary to erect posture, without mentioning the
curves which occur in the vertebral column, and the exceptional
formation of the limbs, &c.
J. J. Rousseau was, therefore, very far from right, when he contended
that man was born to go on all fours.
The height of men, as well as the colour of their skin, are
characteristics which must not be overlooked, since they are of
importance as distinctive attributes of different races.
And first, with regard to height, the differences which this incident
may present in the human species have been greatly exaggerated. Much
allowance must be made in admitting what has been written with respect
to dwarfs, and what has been alleged concerning giants. The Greeks
believed in the existence of a people they called _Pygmies_, but whose
place of abode they always omitted to point out. These were very small
people, who were entirely hidden from view when they entered a field of
standing wheat, and who passed much of their time in resisting the
attacks of Cranes. The same fable was revived in more modern times, with
reference to a people supposed to live in the island of Madagascar, who
were styled _Kymes_. But Pygmies and Kymes are equally fabulous.
Antiquity tells us of giants, but without forming them into a separate
race. It is rather in modern times that the existence of races of human
giants has been put forward. In the sixteenth century, when Magellan had
doubled Cape Horn and discovered the Pacific Ocean, a companion of this
navigator, Pigafetta, gave an altogether extraordinary description of
the Patagonians, or inhabitants of the Tierra del Fuego. He made giants
of them. One of his successors, Leaya, adding yet more to the height of
the Patagonians, assigned to these men a stature of from three to four
metres.
Modern travellers have reduced to accurate proportions the exaggerated
statements of ancient navigators. The French naturalist Alcide d’Orbigny
actually measured a large number of Patagonians, and found that their
height, on an average, was about 1^{m.}73.
This, then, is about the limit of the height which is reached by the
human species.
With reference to the extreme of smallness we are able to arrive at
this by referring to the Bushmen who inhabit Southern Africa. An English
traveller, Barrow, measured all the members of a tribe of Bushmen, and
found that their average height was 1^{m.}31.
The human species, therefore, varies in height to the extent of about
0^{m.}42, that is to say, the difference between the height of the
Patagonians and that of the Bushmen. It is well to make this observation
whilst we are upon this subject, since the supporters of the theory of a
plurality of human races have invoked these differences in height in
support of the multiplicity of the races of humanity. It is clear that,
among animals, races vary in height to a much greater extent than they
do with man; there is, by comparison, a much greater difference in size
between a mastiff and a dog of the Pyrenees, than there is between a
Bushman and a Patagonian.
As regards the colour of the skin of the human race, we find it
necessary to say a few words, since we propose to take this as the basis
of our classification.
The colour of the skin is a very convenient characteristic to fix upon
in order to identify the various races, since this quality is peculiarly
adapted to suggest itself through the eye. Its scientific importance
must, however, by no means be exaggerated. Certain individuals, though
they be members of the White or Caucasian Race, may yet be very darkly
tinted. Arabs are often of a brown colour, which nearly approaches
black, and yet they possess the finest marks of the White or Caucasian
Race. The Abyssinians, although very brown, are not black. The American
Indians, whom we rank as members of the Red Race, often have dark brown
or almost black skins. Among members of the White Race in northern
latitudes, especially women, the skin has often a yellowish tint. We
must add that the colour of the skin is often difficult to fix, since
the shades of colour merge into one another. All this must be said in
order to show how difficult it is to form natural groups of the
innumerable types of our species.
It would be for us now to speak of the physiological characteristics of
the human race; but our consideration of this subject will be limited to
a few words, since the condition of physiological functions is almost
identical among all men, whatever be their race.
There is, nevertheless, an important difference, well worthy of note,
presented by the nervous system when we compare the two extremes of
humanity, namely, the Negro and the white European. In the white man,
the nervous centres, that is the brain and spinal cord, are of much
greater volume than they are in the Negro. In the latter the expansions
from these nervous centres, that is, the nerves properly so called, have
relatively a greater volume.
A similar difference, quite on a par with this, exists in the
circulatory system. In the white man, the arterial system is more
developed than the venous; the reverse is the case with the Negro.
Lastly, the blood of the Negro is more viscous, and of a deeper red than
that of the white man.
With the exception of these general differences, the great physiological
functions proceed in the same manner among all races of men. The
differences are not remarked except when secondary functions are
compared, but these differences then assume proportions of some
consideration.
Climate, customs, and habits are the causes of these variations in the
secondary functions, which at times become so similar as to permit of
confusion in the most opposite races. Let a member of the white race be
thrown into the midst of wild Indians, become a prisoner of the
red-skins, and share their warlike existence in the midst of forests, we
shall see that the sense of sight, as also that of hearing, will attain
in this individual the same perfection which they enjoy in his new
companions. It is by virtue of the prodigious flexibility of our
organism, and of our powers of imitation and assimilation, that the
physiological functions of secondary importance become capable of such
modification.
The intellectual and moral characteristics are those which take the lead
in man. Not only are we unable to pass them over in silence in the
general study of the human race, but much more importance must be
assigned to them than to mere corporeal characteristics. If the
naturalist, when he studies an animal, makes a point, when he has
described his structure and organism, of considering his habits and
manner of life, how much more should he, when treating of man, dwell
upon his intellectual faculties, the stamp which so truly identifies our
species.
Man makes use of language as the means of expressing his intelligence.
If man is provided with the power of speech, which he has in common with
no other animal, it is owing to the fact that in him intelligence is
infinitely more developed than in the animal. It is through the
simultaneous concurrence of all his senses that the faculty of speech is
manifested in man; and the proof of this is, that through the absence of
one of his senses, he loses this faculty. What is meant by a person born
dumb? It is an individual similar in all respects to speaking man, but
differing from him in this, that he came into the world perfectly deaf.
The primary absence of the power of hearing has paralysed the child’s
intelligence with special reference to his imitative faculty, and in
fact, the person called _deaf and dumb_ is originally simply a person
_born deaf_.
Language, then, is but the expression of the highest intelligence.
“Animals have a voice,” says Aristotle, “but man alone speaks.” Nothing
can be truer than this statement of the immortal Greek philosopher.
It is well known how the languages and dialects spoken in the world have
multiplied; and, indeed, nothing is more difficult than to classify all
the languages and dialects that exist. This difficulty becomes more
insurmountable when we consider that languages vary in course of time to
a very considerable extent. The French of Rabelais and Montaigne, who
wrote at the time of the Renaissance, is not very intelligible to us,
and that of French chroniclers at the time of St. Louis can only be
understood by studying it specially and with a dictionary. Modern
Italians read Dante with great difficulty, and the same may be said for
the English as regards their great writer Shakespeare. Languages then
alter very rapidly, even though the people themselves remain stationary.
The alterations are much more serious and rapid when two peoples
amalgamate.
These considerations are sufficient to convey an idea of the problem
which scholars have propounded in wishing to ascertain the language of
primitive humanity. It may be said that such a problem is incapable of
solution. We must therefore despair of finding the mother tongue, and
limit ourselves to those which are her offspring.
Upon a comparison of these last, it has been decided to assign to three
fundamental groups all the languages which have been, and are still,
spoken on the earth; these are, as we have already said, _monosyllabic_,
_agglutinative_ and _inflected languages_.
Chinese is the most decided example of a _monosyllabic_ language. Each
word comprises but one syllable, and has an absolute meaning in itself.
Recourse must be had to the complicated combination of a quantity of
utterances in order to impress all modifications of thought, all
distinctions of time, place, person, condition, &c. One marvels to hear
that the Chinese language comprehends such an immense number of words,
that the life of a single man of letters is not sufficiently long to
allow of his learning all. This apparent wealth is but the most utter
poverty. This language, whose vocabulary is infinite, is simply
detestable. To its imperfection must be attributed the smallness of the
progress which the people of Asia have made in the direction of
intelligence and commerce.
_Agglutinative_ languages, which are spoken by Negroes, as also by many
people of the yellow race, are the first degree of perfection in human
speech. In these the word is no longer unique; variable terminations
attached to each word modify the primitive expression. They contain
_roots_ and words whose function it is to modify these roots.
The third and last degree of perfection in human speech is found in
_inflected languages_. Those languages are so called, in which the same
word is capable of modification a great number of times, in order to
express the different shades of thought, and to translate changes of
time, person, or place. Inflected languages are made up of a series of
different terms, the number of which is by no means large, but the
modification of which, by means of adjuncts, or through the position
they occupy, are indeed innumerable. All European languages, and those
spoken in Asia by people of the white race, are inflected.
If spoken language is the first element which served to constitute human
societies, fixed, that is _written_ language, has been the fundamental
cause of their progress. By means of writing, one generation has been
enabled to hand down to the other the fruits of their experience and
investigation, and thus to lay the foundation of primitive science and
history.
The first forms of writing were mere mnemonic signs. Stones cut to a
certain fashion, pieces of wood to which a conventional form had been
imparted, and such like, were the first signs of written language. One
of the most curious forms of mnemonic writing has been met with both in
the Old and New Worlds; it consisted in joining little bundles of cord
of different colours, in which were tied knots of various kinds. Whoever
ties a knot in his handkerchief in order to recall to mind some fact or
intention, makes use, without knowing it, of the primitive form of
writing.
An advance in writing consisted in representing pictorially objects
which it was wished to designate. The wild Indians of North America
still make use of these rough representations of objects, as a means of
imparting certain information.
This very system is rendered more complete, when the design is
supplemented by a conventional idea. If prudence is indicated by a
serpent, strength by a lion, and lightness by a bird, we here at once
recognize writing properly so called. This last form of writing is known
as the _symbolical_ or _ideographic_.
Symbolical writing existed among the ancients. The hieroglyphics which
are engraved upon the monuments of ancient Egypt, and those which have
been found upon Mexican remains, belong to symbolical writing.
And yet this is not writing in the true sense of the word, which does
not exist until the conventional signs, of which use is made, correspond
with the words or signs of the language spoken, and can actually replace
the language itself.
By the _alphabet_, is meant the collection of conventional signs
corresponding to the sounds which form words. The _alphabet_ is one of
those inventions which have called for the greatest efforts of the human
mind, and it is not without good reason that Greek mythology deified
Cadmus, the inventor of letters. The same admiration for the inventors
of alphabets is, moreover, exhibited among all ancient nations.
* * * * *
It is not only through its immense superiority as regards extent and
power, that the intelligence of man is distinguished from that of the
brute; there is an attribute of intelligence which is strictly peculiar
to our species. This is the faculty of abstraction, which permits of our
collecting and placing together the perceptions of the mind, by that
means arriving at general results. It is through this power of
abstraction, that our intellect has created the wonders which are
familiar to all; that the arts and sciences have been brought to light
and fostered by society.
In connection with the faculty of abstraction, we must allude to the
moral sense, which is a deduction from that same property. The moral
sense is a special attribute of human intelligence, and it may be said
that through this attribute, man’s intellect is distinguished from that
of animals; for this characteristic is most truly peculiar to the mind
of man, and is nowhere found among animals.
Among all people, and at all times, the difference between good and
evil, truth and falsehood, has been recognized. The abstract idea of
moral good and moral evil may certainly differ in different people: one
may admire, what the other detests; in one nation, that, may be held in
good repute, which, in another, is a criminal offence; yet, after all,
the abstract notion of evil and good, does not cease to exist.
Observance of the right of property, self-respect, and regard for human
life, are to be found among all nationalities. If man, in his savage
state, occasionally casts aside these moral notions, it is in
consequence of the social condition of the tribe to which he belongs,
and must be regarded in connexion with the customs of war and the
feeling of revenge. But, in a state of tranquillity and peace, which
condition the philosopher and student must presuppose in framing their
arguments, the notion of evil and good is always to be found. The forms
which the feeling of honour dictates, vary for example in the white man
and the savage, but the feeling itself is never eradicated from the
heart of any.
The religious feeling, the notion of divinity, is another characteristic
which has its origin in the faculty of abstraction. This sentiment is
indissolubly allied to human intelligence. Without wishing, with an
eminent French anthropologist, M. de Quatrefages, to make of
_religiosity_ a fundamental attribute of humanity, and a natural
characteristic of our species, we may say that all men are religious,
that they acknowledge and adore a Creator, a Supreme God. Whether the
statement that certain people, such as the Australians, Bushmen, and
Polynesians, are atheists, as we are assured by some travellers, and
whether the reproaches bestowed upon them in consequence of this, are
well-founded, or whether it is the fact that the travellers who bore
this testimony understood but little of the language and signs of these
different people, as has been suggested by M. de Quatrefages, are
matters of relatively slight importance. The state of brutality of
certain tribes, buried in the midst of inaccessible and savage
countries, and the intellectual imperfection which follows, concealing
from them the notion of God, are nothing when compared with the
universality of religious belief which stirs in the hearts of the
innumerable populations spread over the face of the earth.
Language and writing gave birth to human associations, and later on, to
civilization, by which they were transformed. It is curious to follow
out the progressive forms of human association, and point out the stages
which civilization has passed through in its forward march.
Primitive societies assumed three successive forms. Men were in the
first instance, _hunters_ and _fishers_, then _herdsmen_, and lastly
_husbandmen_. We say, populations were first of all _hunters_ and
_fishers_. The human race then inhabiting the earth, was but small in
number, and this explains it. A group of men gaining their livelihood
simply by hunting and fishing, cannot be composed of a very large number
of individuals. A vast extent of territory is required to nourish a
population, which finds in game and fish its sole means of subsistence.
Moreover, this manner of living is always precarious, for there never is
any certainty that food will be found for the morrow. This continual
preoccupation in seeking the means of subsistence, brings man nearer to
the brute, and hinders him from exercising his intellect upon ennobling
and more useful subjects. Hunting is, moreover, the image of warfare,
and war may very easily arise between neighbouring populations who get
their living in the same manner. If in these eventual collisions,
prisoners are taken, they are sacrificed in order that there may be no
additional mouths to feed.
So long, therefore, as human societies were composed only of hunters and
fishers, they were unable to make any intellectual progress, and their
customs, of necessity remained barbarous. The death of prisoners was the
order of battle.
Societies of _herdsmen_ succeeded those of hunters and fishers. Man
having domesticated first the dog, then the ox, the horse, the sheep or
the llama, by that means ensured his livelihood for the morrow, and was
enabled to turn his attention to other matters besides the quest of
food. We therefore see pastoral societies advancing in the way of
progress, by the improvement of their dress, their weapons, and their
habitations.
But pastoral communities have also need of large tracts of country, for
their herds rapidly exhaust the herbage in one region, and they must
therefore seek farther for pastures, in order that they may be sure of
their food, when that is confined to flesh and milk. Pastoral
populations were therefore of necessity nomadic.
In their reciprocal migrations, pastoral tribes frequently came into
collision, and found it necessary to dispute by armed force the
possession of the soil. War ensued. Since the prisoners taken could be
maintained with comparative ease by the conqueror on condition of their
lending assistance, they were forced to become slaves, and it is thus
that the sad condition of slavery, which was later on to extend in so
aggravated a degree as to develop into a social grievance, had its
origin.
The third form of society was realized as soon as man turned his
attention to agriculture, that is, when he began to make plants and
herbage, artificially produced, an abundant and certain source of
nourishment.
Agriculture affords man certain leisure time and tends to soften his
manners and customs. If war breaks out, its episodes are less cruel in
themselves. The captive can, without actually being reduced to slavery,
be added to the number of those who labour in the fields, and in return
for a consideration contribute to the wellbeing of the tribe. The Serf
here takes the place of the slave; a form of society, composed of
masters and different degrees of servants, becomes definitely organized.
Agricultural people, being relieved from the preoccupations of material
existence, are enabled to foster their intelligence, which becomes
rapidly more abundant. It is thus that civilization first took root in
human society.
These then are the three stages, which, in all countries, mankind have
of necessity passed through before becoming civilized. The progress from
one stage to the next has varied in rapidity in proportion to
circumstances of time and place, and of the country or hemisphere.
Nations, whom we find at the present day but little advanced in
civilization, were on the other hand originally superior to other
nations we may point to. The Chinese were civilized long before the
inhabitants of Europe. They were building superb monuments, were engaged
in the cultivation of the mulberry, were rearing silkworms,
manufacturing porcelain, &c., at the very time when our ancestors, the
Celts and Aryans, clothed in the skins of wild beasts, and tattooed,
were living in the woods in the condition of hunters. The Babylonians
were occupied with the study of astronomy, and were calculating the
orbits of the stars two thousand years before Christ; for the
astronomical registers brought by Alexander the Great from Babylon,
refer back to celestial observations extending over more than ten
centuries. Egyptian civilization dates back to at least four thousand
years before Christ, as is proved by the magnificent statue of Gheffrel,
which belongs to that period, and which, since it is composed of
granite, can only have been cut by the aid of iron and steel tools, in
themselves indicators of an advanced form of industry.
This last consideration should make us feel modest. It shows that
nations whom we now crush by our intellectual superiority, the Chinese
and Egyptians, perhaps also the old inhabitants of Mexico and Peru, were
once far before us in the path of civilization.
* * * * *
It is quite clear that manufactures have tended to hasten the progress
of civilization. It is well worthy of remark that, according as the
matter composing the material of these manufactures has undergone
transformation, so the condition of society has progressed. Two mineral
substances were the objects of primitive manufactures: stone and metal.
Civilization was rough-hewn by instruments made of stone, and has been
finished by those composed of metal. Modern naturalists and
archæologists are therefore perfectly right in dividing the history of
primitive man into two ages: the stone age, and the metal age.
In our work “Primitive Man,” we have followed step by step the course
and oscillations of the primitive manufactures of different peoples. We
have first seen that man being without any other instrument of attack or
defence save his nails and teeth, or a stick, made use of stones, and
formed them into arms and tools. We then saw that he made himself master
of fire, of which he alone understands the use. We then saw him, with
the aid of fire, supply the heat which in cold climates the sun denied,
create during the night artificial light, and add to the insufficiency
of his form of diet, not to speak of the numerous advantages which his
industry enabled him to gain by the application of heat.
As man progressed, the instrument formed merely of stone trimmed to
shape no longer sufficed him; he polished it, and even commenced to
adorn it with drawings and symbols. Thus the arts found their origin.
Metals succeeded stone, and by their use a complete revolution was
effected in human societies. The tool composed of bronze enabled work to
be done, which was out of the question when the agent was stone. Later
on iron made its appearance, and from that time industry progressed with
giant strides.
We have no occasion here to revert to the history of the development of
the industry of man in prehistoric times. We shall confine ourselves to
pointing out that this part of our subject is treated at full length in
our work on “Primitive Man.”
* * * * *
To summarize what we have said: if man, in his bodily formation, is an
animal, in the exalted range of his intellect, he is Nature’s lord.
Although we show that in him phenomena present themselves similar to
those which we encounter in vegetables and plants, yet we see him by his
superior faculties, extend afar his empire, and reign supreme over all
that is around him, the mineral as well as the organized world. The
faculties which properly belong to human intelligence and distinguish
man from the brute, namely, the abstractive faculties, make him the
privileged being of creation, and justify him in his pride, for, besides
the physical power which he is able to exert on matter, he alone has the
notion of duty and the knowledge of the existence of a God.
After these general considerations we proceed to the description of the
different races of men.
We have said that we shall adopt in this work the classification
proposed by M. d’Omalius d’Halloy, modifying it to meet our own views.
We shall therefore describe in their order:
1. _The White Race._
2. _The Yellow Race._
3. _The Brown Race._
4. _The Red Race._
5. _The Black Race._
We would call special observation to the fact that these epithets must
not always be taken in an absolute sense. The meaning they intend to
convey is that each of the groups we establish is composed of men, who
considered as a whole, are more white, yellow, brown, red, or black,
than those of other races. The reader must therefore not be surprised to
find in any given race men whose colour does not agree with the epithet
which we here employ in order to characterize them. In addition to that,
these groups are not founded solely upon the colour of the skin; they
are derived from the consideration of other characteristics, and, above
all, from the languages spoken by the people in question.
THE WHITE RACE.
This race was called by Cuvier the _Caucasian_, since that writer
assigned to the mountains of the Caucasus the first origin of man. It is
now frequently known as the _Aryan_ race, from the name formerly
bestowed upon the inhabitants of Persia. The _Caucasian_ or _Aryan_ race
is admittedly the original stock of our species, and it would seem that
from the region of the Caucasus, or the Persian shores of the Caspian
Sea, this race has spread into different parts of the earth, peopling
progressively the entire globe.
The beautiful oval form of the head is a mark which distinguishes the
_Caucasian_ or _Aryan_ race of men from all others. The nose is large
and straight: the aperture of the mouth moderate in size, enclosed by
delicate lips; the teeth are arranged vertically: the eyes are large,
wide open, and surmounted by curved brows. The forehead is advanced, and
the face well proportioned: the hair is glossy, long, and abundant. This
race it is from which have proceeded the most civilized nations, those
who have most usually become rulers of others.
We shall divide the White Race into three branches, corresponding to
peoples who at the first successively developed themselves in the
north-west, the south-east, and north-east of the Caucasus. These
branches are the _European_, _Aramean_, and _Persian_. This
classification is based upon geographical and linguistic considerations.
M. d’Omalius d’Halloy admits a fourth branch, the _Scythian_, which we
reject, since the people which it comprises belong more properly to
the Yellow Race or to the Aramean branch of the White Race.
[Illustration: SCANDINAVIAN
GREEK
WHITE OR CAUCASIAN RACE]
CHAPTER I.
EUROPEAN BRANCH.
What we have just said with regard to the civilization and power of the
white race applies with most force to the peoples who form the European
branch.
Proceeding upon considerations grounded chiefly upon language, we
distinguish among the peoples forming the European branch, three great
families: the _Teutonic_, _Latin_ and _Slavonic_, to which must be added
a smaller family, the _Greek_.
Although great differences exist between the languages spoken by the
peoples composing these four families, these languages are all in some
manner connected with Sanskrit, that is the language used in the ancient
sacred books of the Hindus. The analogy of European languages with
Sanskrit, added to the antiquity evidenced by the historical records of
many Asiatic nations, and notably of the Hindus, brings us to the
admission that Europeans first came from Asia.
TEUTONIC FAMILY.
The people comprised in the Teutonic family are those who possess in the
highest degree the attributes of the white race. Their complexion, which
is clearer than that of any other people, does not appear susceptible of
becoming brown, even after a long residence in warm climates. Their
eyes are generally blue, their hair is blond; they are of a good height
and possess well proportioned limbs.
From the very earliest times recorded in history, these people have
occupied Scandinavia, Denmark, Germany and a portion of France. They
have also developed themselves in the British Isles, in Italy, Spain,
and the north of Africa: but in these last named countries they have
eventually become mixed with people belonging to other families. What is
more, these same people form at the present day the most important part
of the white population of America and Oceanica, and have reduced into
subjection a large portion of Southern Asia.
We shall divide the Teutonic family into three leading groups: the
_Scandinavians_, _Germans_, and _English_.
[Illustration: 3.--WAKE OF ICELANDIC PEASANTS IN A BARN.]
_Scandinavians._--The Scandinavians have preserved almost unaltered the
typical characteristics of the Teutonic family. Their intelligence is
far advanced, and instruction has been spread among them to such an
extent, that they have given a strong impulse to scientific progress.
The ancient poems of the Scandinavians, which go back as far as the
eighth century, are celebrated in the history of European literature.
The Scandinavians comprise three very distinct populations: the Swedes,
Norwegians, and Danes. To this group must be added the small population
of Iceland, since the language spoken by them is most similar of all to
the ancient Scandinavian.
The Feroë Isles are also inhabited by Scandinavians, and many Swedes are
also met with on the coasts of Finland. But in other countries, to which
in former times the Scandinavians extended their conquests, they have,
in general, mingled with the peoples they subjected.
[Illustration: 4.--WOMEN OF STAVANGER, NORWAY.]
The _Icelanders_ are of middle height and only of moderate physical
power. They are honest, faithful, and hospitable, and extremely fond of
their native country. Their productions are small in extent, as they
understand little more than the manufacture of coarse stuff and the
preparation of leather.
We give here some types of these people.
Fig. 3 is a wake of the peasants.
The Norwegians are robust, active, of great endurance, simple,
hospitable, and benevolent.
In Norway few differences are found in the manners and customs of the
different classes of society. Customs here are truly democratic, the
peasant plays the chief part in the affairs of the country. The popular
diet dictates its will to the government.
[Illustration: 5.--CITIZEN OF STAVANGER.]
M. de Saint Blaise in his work, _Voyage dans les Etats Scandinaves_,
describes the Norwegian as a rough and moody but reliable character. One
thing which struck him was the absence of sociability between the two
sexes. They marry usually before attaining twenty-five years of age,
when the woman devotes herself entirely to her husband and household
affairs.
When the two sexes meet at meals, they separate immediately the repast
is at an end. The result of this is a too familiar manner, an absence
of constraint among the men, and a neglect in the dress of the women
which contrasts strongly with their natural grace.
[Illustration: 6.--COSTUMES OF THE TELEMARK (NORWAY).]
In figures 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, we give types of the inhabitants of Norway.
The _Danes_ (the old _Jutes_ or _Goths_) are a people proud of their
race, and full of valour and stubbornness. The men are tall and strong;
the women slender and active. Their hair is blond, their eyes are blue,
and their complexion ruddy. The children are fresh and rosy, the old men
lithesome and erect in their walk. Their voices are good and vigorous,
they speak in an energetic manner. We encounter in Denmark a strange
mixture of democratic and feudal customs: perpetual entails are
contrasted with laws whose object is equality. The working classes have
an ardent desire to possess land in their own right.
[Illustration: 7.--WOMEN OF CHRISTIANSUND (NORWAY).]
There are in Denmark three classes of peasantry: those who possess both
house and garden, those who possess merely a house, and those who only
rent apartments. The first of these furnish their board with rich plate
and utensils; their wives and children go to work in the fields
decorated with rings and bracelets.
The people therefore enjoy a considerable amount of comfort. Add to this
a general degree of instruction, which extends even to the peasant’s
cottage, and which embraces notions of agriculture, geography, history
and arithmetic. The civilization of Denmark is, therefore, very
considerable, and certainly greater than that of France, England, Spain,
and Italy.
Drunkenness is rarely met with in Denmark, and marriage is considered
sacred.
The marriages of the Fionian peasants last seven days. They dance and
make merry three days before and three days after that on which the
marriage takes place. The ceremony is performed amid a flourish of
trumpets. The bridegroom is elegantly dressed, the bride still more so;
she wears, moreover, a kind of diadem in which flowers are seen mingling
with gold.
[Illustration: 8.--BOY AND GIRL OF THE LAWERGRAND (NORWAY).]
_Germans._--When wandering as nomadic tribes in the woods, that is, at
the time of the Roman Empire, the ancient inhabitants of Germany much
resembled their neighbours, the Gauls. They were men of large stature
and vigorous frame, with white skins. Their hair, however, was usually
red, while among the Gauls the ruling colour was blond. Their head was
large, with a broad forehead and blue eyes. But the modern descendants
of the old inhabitants of Germany have undergone many modifications,
which would render it difficult at the present day, to find, in the
greater portion of that country, general characteristics based upon the
structure of the head, and the colour of the eyes or hair.
The modern inhabitants of Germany, the Germans, occupy a very large
portion of Germany proper and of Eastern Prussia, as well as a broad
band of country to the right of the Rhine. They are found also in
different parts of Hungary, Poland, Russia, and North America. The
Germans of the East and South having mixed much with the peoples of
Southern Europe, do not represent exclusively the Teutonic type; some of
them are met with who have brown hair and black eyes.
[Illustration: 9, 10.--SUABIANS (STUTTGARD).]
We give in the accompanying illustrations (figs. 9 to 14) some types and
costumes of the inhabitants of Germany proper (Baden, Würtemberg, Suabia
and Bavaria). The national costumes of Alsace are also shown.
We shall borrow from a work, published in 1860 under the title “_Les
Races Humaines et leur Part dans la Civilisation_,” by Dr. Clavel, an
interesting description of the customs of modern Germany:--
“Impinging, at its south-western frontier, upon the Latin world, at its
south-eastern frontier, upon the Slavonian world, and at its northern
frontier, upon Scandinavia, Germany,” says Dr. Clavel, “does not admit
of any very distinct definition. Throughout the whole periphery of this
country there exists no identity either of customs, language, or
religion. Its provinces on the frontiers of Denmark are half
Scandinavian; those bordering on Russia or Turkey are half Slavonic;
those which are neighbours of Italy or France are half Latin: the
provinces which together represent the frontiers of Germany, form a zone
more mixed and various than is possessed by the frontiers of any other
nationality.
“It is only toward the centre of the country that we find in all its
purity the blond Germanic type, the feudal organization and the numerous
principalities which are its consequences. It is here that we find the
conditions of climate which appear to produce this race with blue eyes,
red and white complexion, tall figures, and full, powerful frames.
“Whilst the Latin, glorying in the light of heaven, enlarges his
windows, builds open terraces, and clears his forests that he may plant
vineyards in their stead; the German loves above all things shade and
mystic retreats. He hides his house in the midst of trees, limits his
windows in size, and lines his streets with leafy elms; he reveres, nay,
almost worships his old oak trees, endows them with soul and language,
and makes of them the abode of a Divinity.
“In order thoroughly to enter into the German genius, we must wander
among the paths of their old forests, observe and analyze carefully the
effects of light and shade, springing up in ubiquitous confusion,
intersecting confined and narrow perspectives, lending isolated objects
a brightness vividly contrasting with the neighbouring obscurity,
changing even the appearance of the face in their alternations, and
forming dark backgrounds, illuminated by prismatic tints and glowing
sunbeams. Pausing beneath the venerable trees, we must listen to sounds,
re-echoed a thousand times, then dying away among the thickets, to give
place to the rustling of aspen leaves, to the sighing of the firs, or to
the harmonious murmurs of rivulets which force their way amid the flags
and water-lilies. We must inhale the air scented with the pungent odour
of fallen leaves, or the exhilarating scent of the wild cherry blossom.
It is only then that we come to appreciate the love of nature and the
druidical tone which pervade German literature; we understand Goethe’s
passion for natural history; the poem of Faust becomes full of meaning;
a feeling of melancholy creeps over the mind and leads us to the
contemplation of things that are soft, sad, mysterious, fantastic,
irregular, and original.
[Illustration: 11, 12.--SUABIANS (STUTTGARD).]
“Being brought thus in contact with nature, the German is natural and
primitive; he sympathizes with the world’s infancy. He easily goes back
to the past and the consideration of olden times; but it is not in him
to anticipate the future, and he regards progress with distaste. If he
advances towards equality and unity, it is the ideal of the Latins which
impels him. There is in him a resistance which forms part of his patient
and cold nature. His movements are sluggish. His language is hardly
formed. His literature, overflowing with imagination, is wanting in
elegance and purity, it is not ripe enough for prose and unfit to form a
book.
“The plastic arts of Germany also possess the simplicity and variety
which are produced by imagination; but they are wanting in proportion,
in purity of style and elegance; they are capable of arranging neither
lines nor colours; their productions often verge on the grotesque, or
are marked by heaviness or pedantry, and they clearly are not the work
of children of the sun.
“The Germans possess an ear which appreciates sound in a wonderful
manner, and reduces with ease to melody the fleeting impressions of the
Soul.
“. . . . He who possesses a strong and enduring constitution brings to
his means of action energy of will. His projects are neither frivolously
conceived, nor abandoned without good reason, and they are often
followed out in spite of a thousand obstacles. This patient and
continuous activity on the part of the Germans enables them to succeed
in all forms of industry, in spite of their subdivision and other
hindrances resulting from their political constitution.
“When men are laborious, patient, and frugal, we may expect to see
family life become strongly organized, and exercise a decisive influence
upon national customs.
“Love, whose duty it is to bring together the sexes into a united
existence, is in Germany, neither very positive, nor very romantic; it
is dreamy in its character. It seeks its _object_ in youth and speedily
finds it; faithfulness is then observed until the time for marriage
arrives.
“Early engagements being admitted by custom, betrothed couples are seen
together, arm in arm, among the crowd at public or private festivals, or
in lonely woods, or in twilight seclusion. Pleasure and pain they share
with one another, happy in the conviction that their hearts beat in
unison, and in the repetition, over and over again, of tender
assurances. The calmness of their temperament and the certainty of
belonging to one another some day, diminish the danger of these long
interviews. The young man respects the girl who is to bear his name and
rule his home with her virtuous example; she, on her part, shrinks from
a seduction which would dishonour her and compromise her future life.
“Such customs cannot but meet with approbation. They assure the future
of a woman, and save her from coquetry. They form a man for the
performance of his duties as head of a family, make him thoughtful for
the future, save him from licentiousness, which wears out the heart as
well as the constitution, and lastly, render his love permanent by
reducing it to habit.
“When the wedding-day, looked forward to for so many years, arrives, the
characters of man and woman have taken their respective stamp. The young
people know each other; they have no ground for suspecting deceit, for
the singleness of their heart admits of only one affection.
[Illustration: 13.--BAVARIANS.]
“Everything here contributes to heighten the dignity of woman. From her
girlhood, and during the years in which her beauty is blossoming, she
feels herself an object of devotion--she is _mistress_. Whatever she
grants, however slight the favour may be, acquires a high value. The
offering sanctified by her kiss is far more costly than gold; the riband
she has worn becomes equal to a decoration.”
This picture of German customs has special reference to the inhabitants
of Central Germany, the Austrians.
[Illustration: 14.--BADENERS.]
It is in the central portion of Germany that we meet with this patient
activity, and the gentle manners described by Dr. Clavel. But these
qualities are far from being the attributes of the inhabitants of the
North and West. The Germans of the North and West appeared in their true
character during the war of 1870, when a series of deplorable fatalities
and mournful inconsistencies had delivered up unhappy France to the
mercy of the invader. We then learnt how to appreciate this reputation
for good-nature, simplicity, and gentleness, which was commonly attached
to the inhabitants of the Ultra-Rhenic countries. The good-nature
developed itself into an undisguised ferocity, the simplicity into dark
duplicity, and the gentleness into haughty and brutal violence. The
hated and jealous fury of the Prussians, who rushed upon France with the
avowed intention of reducing her to impotence, and erasing her, if
possible, from the rôle of nations; their cold-blooded cruelties and
shameless rapine, are so impressed upon the minds of all Frenchmen, that
we need not recall them. Prussian barbarity attained the level of that
practised by the Vandals in the second century.
Our scholars have found some difficulty in explaining the anomaly which
existed between the ferocious conduct of the German armies, and the very
opposite reputation enjoyed by our neighbours beyond the Rhine.
Accustomed to regard the Germans as peaceful and gentle, sentimental and
dreamy, we, in France, were painfully surprised to find facts contrast
so cruelly with an opinion so generally entertained. An ethnological
work, published in 1871 by M. de Quatrefages in the “_Revue des Deux
Mondes_,”[4] has afforded a scientific explanation of this anomaly.
[4] Issue of Feb. 15th.
M. de Quatrefages has shown, by considerations at once linguistic,
geological, ethnological, and historical, that the Prussians, properly
so called, that is, the inhabitants of Pomerania, Mecklenburg,
Brandenburg, and Silesia, have but little in common with the German
race--that they are not, in fact, Germans, but result from a mixture of
Slavonians and Finns with the primitive inhabitants of those countries.
The Finns overran, at a very early period, Pomerania and
Eastern-Prussia; later on, the Slavonians conquered the same territory,
as well as Brandenburg and Silesia. Certain Germanic tribes--to which
add the results of a French immigration into Prussia, which took place
under Louis XIV., after the revocation of the edict of Nantes--must be
joined to the stock of Slavonians and Finns, in order to make up the
Prussian race as it at present exists. The northern Slavonians possessed
a well-known coarseness of manner, and were of large stature and
powerful constitution. The Finns, or primitive inhabitants of the shores
of the Baltic, were characterized by cunning and violence, united to an
extraordinary tenacity. The modern Prussians revive all these ancestral
defects.
M. Godron, a naturalist of Nancy, who has very successfully studied the
German race, says, “The Prussians are neither Germans nor Slavonians:
they are Prussians!” This fact is now clearly shown by the
investigations of M. de Quatrefages. From an ethnological point of view,
the Prussians are very different from the German populations, who are
now subjected to the rule of the Emperor William under the pretext of
German unity.
Two different written languages exist among the German people; that of
the Netherlands and German.
The Netherland language has given birth to three dialects--_Dutch_,
_Flemish_, and _Frieslandic_.
The Dutch, in the seventeenth century, were the greatest maritime
commercial people in the world, and founded at that period a certain
number of colonies.
The Dutchman is by nature reserved and silent. Simplicity is the marked
feature of his character. He possesses patriotic feeling in a high
degree, and is capable of enthusiasm and devotion in the defence of his
strange and curious territory, preserved from the sea by dykes and
formidable constructions, and irrigated by innumerable canals, which
form the ordinary means of communication, and which link together the
seas and the rivers, as well as the towns.
* * * * *
_English._--The English may be considered as resulting from a mixture of
the _Saxons_ and _Angles_ with the people who inhabited the British
Isles before the Saxon invasion.
Whence came and who were the _Angles_ and _Saxons_?
According to Tacitus, the Angles were a small nation inhabiting the
regions next the ocean. The Saxons, according to Ptolemy, dwelt between
the mouths of the Elbe and Schleswig. About the fifth century after
Christ, the Angles and Saxons invaded the British Isles, and mingled
with the inhabitants, who then comprised Celts, Latins, and Arameans.
During the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, fresh invasions of
Great Britain, by the Normans and Danes, added to this blood, already so
mixed, another foreign infusion.
From this medley of different peoples has sprung the English nation, in
whom are found at the same time, the patient and persevering character,
the serious disposition, and the love of family life, introduced by the
Saxons, and which is the peculiarity of the German nature, combined with
the lightness and impressionability of the Celt.
The physical type which is the result of this mixture, that is, the
English type, corresponds with the combination of races we have
specified. The head is in shape long and high, and is in this respect to
be distinguished from the square heads of the Germans, particularly
those of Suabia and Thuringia. The English generally possess a clear and
transparent skin, chestnut hair, tall and slender figures, a stiff gait,
and a cold physiognomy. Their women do not offer the noble appearance
and luxurious figure of the Greek and Roman women; but their skins
surpass in transparency and brilliancy those of the female inhabitants
of all other European countries.
We borrow a few pages from the work of Dr. Clavel upon “_Les Races
Humaines et leur Part dans la Civilisation_,” in order to convey an
exact knowledge of the nature and customs of our neighbours across the
Channel:--
“When he examines,” says Dr. Clavel, “the geographical position of
England, a land possessing a humid rather than a cold climate, the
observer pictures to himself beforehand that he is about to meet a
people of imperious appetite, of a vigorous circulation, of a powerfully
organized locomotive system, and a sanguineo-lymphatic temperament. The
power of the digestive functions shows that the nervous system is unable
to obtain dominion, and that there is a lack of sensibility: the
frequent fogs, which destroy the perfumes of the earth, the stormy
winds of the ocean, and the absence of wine, announce a poverty of
sentiment and inspiration, and of the arts founded upon them.
“The level plains, which are as a rule met with in England, are not
favourable to the development of the lower extremities, and it is a fact
that the power of the English lies, not so much in the legs, as in the
arms, shoulders, and loins. The fist is an Englishman’s natural weapon,
either for attack or defence; his popular form of duel is boxing, while
the foot plays an important part in the form of duel which, in France,
bears the characteristic name of _Savate_.
“This power in the upper regions of the body gives to an Englishman a
peculiar appearance. In view of his brawny shoulders, his thick and
muscular neck, and broad chest, we rightly divine the ready workman, the
daring seaman, the indefatigable mechanic, the soldier who is ready to
die at his post but who bears up with difficulty against forced marches
and hunger. His blond or reddish hair, his white skin and grey eyes,
bespeak the mists of his country; the barely marked nape of his neck,
and the oval form of his cranium, indicate that Finn blood flows in his
veins; his maxillary power, and the size of his teeth, evidence a
preference for an animal diet. He has the high forehead of the thinker,
but not the long eyes of the artist.
“The insular position of England, its excellent situation upon the
Atlantic, its numerous and magnificent seaport towns, its watercourses
and the facilities for conducting its internal navigation, all suggest a
large maritime commerce and the habits which accompany it. But neither
the soil, the climate, nor the geographical position, can account for
the aptitudes imported by different races.
“The Englishman is two-fold--Celt and German--and it is only a
superficial examination which can confound them.
“The Celt, whom in the absence of precise notions of an earlier
population we have come to consider as indigenous, resembles the
Neo-Latin races, and, above all, the French. He rarely exists
collectively, except in Ireland, and some mountainous districts of Wales
and Scotland. His cranium and features indicate artistic aptitudes. He
prefers Christianity in the Anglican Catholic form. Like the old Gauls,
he delights in wine, laughter, gaming, dancing, conversation, raillery,
and fighting. He is spirited and fond of joking, frank and hospitable;
but his versatility renders him incapable of steadily pursuing an
enterprise to the end, of careful reflection, or of thought for the
future. Through his powerlessness to combine his powers and act
collectively, he has become a prey to enemies, who were superior to him
neither in number, courage, nor even in intelligence. Old and joyous
England and Ireland became subject to the Dane, the Saxon, and the
Norman: they lost their proverbial gaiety, their bards, their democratic
tendency, and their civilization.
“The physical and moral differences between the modern conquerors of
England were but slight. They all came from the coasts of the Baltic
Sea, and all possessed the elementary characteristics of the German and
Scandinavian, and the aptitudes which they inherited from the old Sea
Kings. They had, moreover, strength, which bade them regard conquest as
a right, and take what they desired; pride, which bade them hold up
their head even against the storm; individual initiative, which
demanded, above all things, personal liberty; a tenacity, that nothing
discouraged; an intelligence, capable of every subtlety; a general
sensuality, which converted the bodily necessities into a means of
enjoyment; a lack of sentiment, which pre-supposed a want of aptitude
for art; and, lastly, a temperament which was calm and robust under all
circumstances.
“This type, which is still found among all branches of society, not
excepting the aristocracy, has been modified by its combination with the
Celtic element, but it still remains predominant. The Saxon, as a rule,
absorbs or destroys the other races; we may say, he drinks in their
vitality, but is unable to assimilate himself to their temperament.
“We must, therefore, expect to find the customs of England proper, more
Scandinavian than Celtic. The pleasures of olden time have fallen off;
the merry gossips of those days find no place but in literature;
raillery, when it comes from Saxon lips, is armed with sharp teeth, and
tears away the morsel it attacks.
“When intelligence is averted from the ideal, and constantly directed
towards the positive matters of life, it acquires the habit of
considering in all things the question of profit and loss; it becomes
averse to waste, which destroys property unprofitably, and loves order,
without which, material prosperity is impossible; it guides the organic
forces to productive industry, agriculture, and commerce, where they
are fostered and matured; and last of all, to speculation, which
anticipates the greater part of the fruits of commerce, agriculture, and
manufacture. The Saxon finds everywhere the means of speculating, aided
in his manœuvres by the intricacy of his commercial laws. As a
consequence of his phlegmatic temperament, he gives way neither to the
snares of enthusiasm, nor to the deceptions of discouragement. He
reasons aright, both for the present and the future. In dealing craftily
with his antagonist, he is well able to guard himself against the
weaknesses of feeling. His face rarely betrays his convictions, and his
features are devoid of the mobility which would prove disadvantageous.
“Thus it is that the Englishman joins subtlety to will; hence his
practical power. Being strong and able, he acquires a confidence in
himself which easily degenerates into pride, and saves him from
smallness of character. He is neither obsequious, nor prone to flattery;
he casts on one side the refinements of politeness, which he regards as
humiliating in one who employs them; he keeps his word, and considers
that he would be dishonoured in breaking it; but he makes the best of
all his advantages. For him, life is a struggle for triumph, without
regard for those who are unable to contend, and who succumb in the
attempt. He asks no pity, and gives but little; he cannot be called
cruel, for cruelty is a form of weakness; but he does not hesitate to
oppress an enemy, when to do so would be productive of material
advantage. In attaching to an Englishman the characteristic of
individual initiative, which is met with among all the branches of the
Germanic tree, we rightly expect to find him fond of liberty, without
which his powers would have no vent.
“But this liberty would soon lead him to destruction, did he not join to
it the spirit of propriety, and temper it with the love of order, which
he acquires in his industrial and commercial pursuits.
“. . . . His arts are wanting neither in talent, observation, delicacy,
nor humour; they represent men and things with the most scrupulous
accuracy; but they lack feeling, warmth, and ideality; they know not how
to bring the passions into play, and are unable to soar above the
descriptive. His stage is a failure, as is his music, both in themselves
pure creations of feeling; and his architecture is governed by the
nature of materials, and the application of his buildings to the needs
of life. This rage for practical convenience, which makes the London
houses so unsightly, has also been instrumental in simplifying his
language to amphibology, and curtailing the accent to such an extent as
to create discord. When harmony in the means of expressing thought is
wanting, the art of talking well is no longer exercised in conversation,
but becomes concentrated in discourse. There is scarcely an intermediate
between the latter form of speech, and incorrect conversation among
individuals. The result of this is, that the Englishman, on almost every
occasion, expresses himself in speeches, which are listened to and
commented upon with an imperturbable patience, but which have the grave
fault of imparting to social relations a tone of pedantry and stiffness.
As soon as that exists, there is no longer any room for fun and humour.
Following out the spirit of formality, many things become no longer
permissible, or cannot be dealt with except by reference to strict
rules. Propriety, therefore, includes, over and above pure politeness, a
number of conventionalities which in themselves constitute nothing less
than a social tyranny. An act, which, everywhere else, would be regarded
as perfectly natural, easily becomes food for scandal; and in society,
by far the greater number of those one meets abstain from action,
speech, or gesticulation. An icy reserve is the tone generally assumed.
“In such society as this, indiscretion and flippancy are almost out of
the question. But, although the English scorn a lie, they cannot speak
the whole truth: they find it necessary to reserve a portion, and
frequently the most important part. The result is a peculiar form of
hypocrisy which bears the name of cant, and which is really the bane of
English society. Owing to this, social life is enclosed in a circle of
intolerance which imparts to it a painful uniformity. Each person is
obliged to do as every one else, to such an extent, that in the land of
liberty, the spirit is oppressed and dejected to a degree suggestive of
suicide. Hence it is that so many English, in order to escape spleen,
are forced to leave their country.
“The Englishwoman is tall, fair, and strongly built. Her skin is of
dazzling freshness; her features are small and elegantly formed; the
oval of her face is marked, but it is somewhat heavy toward the lower
portion; her hair is fine, silky, and charming; and her long and
graceful neck imparts to the movements of her head a character of grace
and pride.
“So far, all about her is essentially feminine; but upon analyzing her
bust and limbs, we find that the large bones, peculiar to her race,
interfere with the delicacy of her form, enlarge her extremities, and
lessen the elegance of her postures and the harmony of her movements.
“Woman moves about two centres, which are the head and the heart. The
latter deals with bodily grace, roundness and delicacy of form,
inspiration in feeling, devotion in love, sympathy, a manifold and
undefinable seductiveness, a sort of divine radiance, which is grace,
tenderness, and all that is charming. The former supplies intelligence,
spirit, animation, and consistency of action.
“If all we see in an Italian or Spanish woman tells of the supremacy of
heart, which Lord Byron loved so much, all in the Englishwoman reveals
mental superiority. Her physical and mental powers are well balanced.
“There are few mental occupations in which a daughter of Great Britain
cannot engage. She acquires knowledge with facility; she writes with
elegance, and would be capable at a stretch of improvising a speech; she
is witty and even brilliant; capable of dealing with abstract sciences;
she can contend with the other sex in sagacity and depth; yet her
conversation does not captivate. She lacks a thousand feminine
instincts, and this lack is revealed in her toilette, the posture she
assumes, and in her actions and movements. She rarely possesses musical
taste. Her language and song do not captivate the ear; her appreciation
of colour, form, and perfume, are at fault. She loves what is striking,
and instead of attaining harmony, revels in discord.
“No aristocracy, can, with reference to ability, be compared with that
of England. Having ensured the influence of wealth by seizing the land,
and substituting in its possession the son for the father, by virtue of
the right of primogeniture, it has given the legislative power to the
proprietors of the soil, through the medium of a House of Peers, whose
prerogatives and domains pass to the eldest son, and of a House of
Commons, the right to elect whose members is centred chiefly in the
tenants of large proprietors. Where the nobility enjoy such privileges,
royalty necessarily assumes a dependent position, and becomes merely an
instrument. Positions of influence in the administration, the army, the
magistracy, and the church, fall of right to families of distinction,
who dispose of all the strength of the country, and apply it for the
benefit of their own caste. Taxation is organized in such a manner as to
weigh chiefly upon the lower classes, while the produce falls to the
advantage of the privileged class as emoluments.
“. . . Before the British aristocracy could attain the importance it now
possesses, many conquests were necessary, to which the substance of
Spain, Portugal, Holland, and of a hundred and thirty millions of
Indians, has fallen a prey. The attainment of this object, has,
moreover, forced fifteen millions of English people to exist upon a
daily stipend, when there is any stipend at all; and, to aid it, the
cannon has opened the frontiers of China to the opium trade, and to the
products of manufactures which must either sell or succumb. The only
material compensation for all these evils, is, that immense power is
given to wealth. The cultivation of luxury, in every form, has increased
tenfold the number of objects to be provided. The houses are crowded
with a number of articles of furniture, the use of which is a science in
itself; the tables are loaded with an infinite variety of dishes,
fruits, plate, and glass; stuffs of a thousand different shades are
offered to the caprice of fashion, to be used either in adorning the
person, or in the decoration of apartments; but for all that, the house
is neither more beautiful nor more wholesome as an abode, the table is
not more hospitable or more joyous, nor is the dress more elegant or
warm; comfort stifles what is merely beautiful, which wealthy men always
associate with a large outlay.
“Among the English aristocracy we must expect, neither the exquisite
elegance of the Latin aristocracy, nor the appreciation of art, which,
in Italy, and even in France, gives birth to so many marvels.
“Wealth has been able to accumulate in the galleries of private persons,
pictures and statues, the work of other nations, but has been quite
unable to raise up a school of architecture, of painting, or of
sculpture; or even to assign a single division to music. Workers and
statesmen abound in England; but the condition of artists is bad in the
extreme. A great poet emerges from the ranks of the nobility, and
employs his talent in scourging the aristocracy, and laying bare the
customs of his country. Eminent writers assign a philosophic value to
the romance of gentle blood, and paint in the blackest colours the
mercantile and feudal genius.
[Illustration: 15.--ENGLISHMAN.]
“The men of iron, who have transformed England into a sort of freehold,
seem to think themselves altogether different from the rest of humanity;
they pass through the midst of other populations without being
influenced by the contact, or modifying the etiquette which rules their
excesses at table and in drinking, and which governs field sports and
courtship. A word or gesture is sufficient to mark its author as of low
breeding, and to jar upon the nerves of the nobility, which are
susceptible of still greater irritation, when writers of ability venture
to speak of lords as of simple mortals; but this scandal has been
obviated in the _fashionable_ novel, in which, amid a halo of ennui,
aristocratic decorum shines forth.
“All this is productive of a meditated coldness and repulsive pride,
which renders expansion and joviality impossible. Moral oppression and
ennui permeate their whole life, and in the end render existence
insupportable. These rich and powerful men become the victims of
_spleen_.
“Those who find no relief in political struggles, seek in foreign
countries change and diversion; the more robust share their time between
the table, their horses, and their dogs; they drink to a frightful
extent; they unearth the fox, and follow him on horseback, clearing
every object although at the risk of their neck, or else they travel a
hundred leagues to see a thorough-bred horse run, and to risk upon him
what would make the fortune of ten plebeians.
“Such a life as this can be led only in the country. It must therefore
be noticed that the English nobility pass nine months out of the year at
their country seats, in the exercise of the gorgeous hospitality which
is met with in all large oligarchies, and cultivating there the comforts
of ease to a degree bordering on fanaticism.
“Beneath the shade of feudality, exists a class of farmers,
manufacturers, merchants, capitalists, and speculators, which consoles
itself for the humiliations it experiences by those which, in its turn,
it imposes on the lower classes. This middle class, oppressed by that
above, and menaced by that below it, presents a singular mixture of
timidity and resolution. Its existence, ever precarious, makes it easily
susceptible of alarm, ready to yield to the terms of the powerful, or to
assume any character. Its enthusiasm and admiration are inexhaustible,
when it foresees, in the conduct of its superiors, some gain to itself;
but the resistance it offers is most powerfully adroit when public
affairs tend to do it harm. Danger hardly ever takes it by surprise, as
its signs are seen from afar and anticipated.
“One would almost expect to find Israelitish traits of character in
people who make the Bible their book of books; who, while undergoing
extortion, still retain the feeling of dignity, who are passionately
fond of money and whatever conduces to its possession; who risk that
they may gain, and compensate one chance of loss by three chances of
profit; who respect the letter of the law more than its intention, and
who employ commercial uprightness as a clever means of making a fortune.
“In the middle class, the British aristocracy finds a means of keeping
under the proletarian class, true representatives of the old Celts.
These unfortunate men are reproached, with drunkenness, to which they
fly as a means of forgetting their misfortunes; with brutality, which
exhibits itself in blows, injuries, prize fights, and cock-fighting;
with coarse sensuality, which feeds upon meat and beer; with
selfishness, which extends even to the glasses of drinkers; and lastly,
with stronger criminal desires than are met with among other civilized
nations.
“But in spite of these vices, the sad fruit of misery, wretchedness, and
ignorance, they possess substantial virtues. The English workman has in
his heart an innate feeling of generosity. He is gentle to the weak, and
rude to the strong. Goodness charms him, and whatever is generous is
sure to meet with his support. Although blinded by self-interest to the
point of being altogether without a notion of justice, he can hardly be
accused of avarice, since he gives cheerfully. His friendship is firm,
although by no means demonstrative; he keeps his word, and despises an
untruth. Reverses redouble instead of causing him to abate his efforts;
he never despairs of what he undertakes, since he is ready to sacrifice
all for success, even his life. He has none of the sordid vanities which
stain the intermediate classes. For his country, which is to him less a
mother than a step-mother, he entertains an inexhaustible affection. To
her he devotes his whole existence; he is rewarded by his own admiration
of her, and deludes himself so far as to call her ‘Jolly Old England.’”
* * * * *
Transplanted into the New World, the Englishman has already assumed a
type varying somewhat from that we have described--the _Yankees_, as the
Indians call them, that is to say, the _silent men_ (Ya-no-ki), have
lost in North America the general character and physiognomy which they
possessed in the mother-country. A new type, moral and physical,
approaching more to that of the Southern Red Indians, has been formed
among the inhabitants of North America, which type is exaggerated
towards the West, where men are rougher and coarser than in the North.
LATIN FAMILY.
The _Latin family_ originated in Italy, whence it extended its conquests
over a large portion of Europe, Asia, and Africa, thus forming the Roman
empire. At the present time the Latin languages are spoken only in
certain portions of this vast empire, namely, in Italy, Spain, France,
and some other countries in the south-east of Europe.
The people who belong to the Latin family are, in general, of a middle
stature, with black hair and eyes, and a complexion susceptible of
turning brown under the sun’s action; but they present many variations.
They speak numerous dialects, which frequently become confounded one
with another.
Among the people who form the Latin family are separately classed: the
_French_, the _Spaniards_, the _Italians_, and the _Moldo-Walachians_.
_French._--The Franks proceeded from the mixture of the Gauls with the
ancient inhabitants of the land, that is, the people who in olden times
were indifferently called _Aquitanians_ or _Iberians_, and of whom a few
are still to be found in the Basque inhabitants of the lower regions of
the Pyrenees, recognized at once by their language, which is that of the
old Iberians.
But who were these Gauls, who, by combination with the national blood of
the Iberians, formed the Franks?
The Gauls were a branch of the _Celts_ (or _Gaels_), an ancient race of
men, who coming from Asia, at an early period overran and occupied a
portion of Western Europe, more particularly that portion which now
forms Belgium, France as far as the Garonne, and a part of Switzerland.
Later on, the Celts or _Gaels_ extended their conquests as far even as
the British Isles. It was in the twelfth or tenth century before Christ
that they invaded Gaul, and subdued the indigenous Iberian population.
Of their Asiatic origin the Celts preserved no more than a few dogmas of
Eastern worship, the organization of a priestly sect, and a language,
which, through its close connection with the sacred language of the
Indian Brahmins, reveals the kinship which united these people with
those of Asia.
The Celts were a nomadic people, and lived essentially by hunting and
pasturage. The men were very tall: their height being, it has been
asserted, from six to seven feet. Many tribes dyed their skin with a
colour extracted from the leaf of the woad. Others tattooed themselves.
Many adorned their arms or breasts with heavy chains of gold, or clothed
themselves in tissues of bright colours, analogous to the Scotch tartan.
Later on they gave themselves up to greater luxury. Above their tunic
they wore the _saya_, a short cloak, striped with purple bands and
embroidered with gold or silver. Among the poorer classes this _saya_
was replaced by the skin of some animal, or by a cloak of coarse and
dark-coloured wool. Others wore the _simar_, which is analogous to the
modern blouse or the _caraco_ of the Normandy peasants. The second
article of dress worn by the Gaelic men, was a tight and narrow form of
trouser, the _braya_. The women wore an ample puckered tunic with an
apron. Some restricted their dress to a leathern bag.
Their weapons consisted of stone knives, axes furnished with sharp flint
or shell points, clubs, and spears hardened in the fire. Celtic stone
hatchets are common in the West of France.
The Celts were warlike and bold. They marched against the enemy to the
sound of the _karnux_, a sort of trumpet, the top of which represented a
wild beast crowned with flowers. As soon as the signal was given, the
front rank threw itself stark naked and impetuously into the struggle.
Leading a wandering form of life, the Celts constructed no fixed
habitations. They moved from one pasturage to another in covered
waggons, erecting simple cabins, which they abandoned after a few days.
They sometimes took shelter in caves, sleeping upon a little straw, or
the skins of animals spread upon the earth. More frequently, however,
they ate and slept under the open sky. Fond of tales and recitations,
they appear to have been inquisitive and garrulous. Their habits were
peaceful.
A branch of the Celtic family, the _Cymris_, who, like their
predecessors, originally came from Asia, overran the fertile plains
which extend from the moorlands at Bordeaux to the mouth of the Rhine,
their course being arrested toward the west only by the ocean, toward
the east by the Vosges, and toward the south-east by the mountains of
Auvergne and the last ridges of the Pyrenees and the Cevennes. The
_Cymris_, or Belgians, brought with them the simplicity of the north,
and having built towns, called upon the Gaels to join them.
These two groups, distinct in themselves although of the same race,
lived apart in some countries, while in others they held supremacy. The
Irish and the Highlanders of Scotland were _Gaels_. The _Gaelic_ element
also predominated in Eastern France. The inhabitants of Wales, Belgium,
and Brittany belonged to the Cymrian branch; but the Romans confounded
these two races under the general name of _Britons_ in Great Britain,
and _Gauls_ in Gaul.
We will briefly review the physical types, manners, and customs of the
Gauls.
At the time when Julius Cæsar invaded and conquered the Gauls, they were
distinguished as the northern, north-eastern, western, and southern
Gauls. The first were remarkable for the abundance and length of their
hair; hence their name of _long-haired Gauls_. Those of the south and
south-east were known as the _braya-wearing Gauls_.
The Gauls used artificial means of giving to their hair a bright red
colour. Some allowed it to fall around their shoulders; others tied it
in a tuft above the head. Some wore only thick mustachios, others
retained the whole beard.
When arming for battle, the Gauls donned the _saya_. They used arrows,
slings, one-edged swords in iron or copper, and a sort of halberd, which
inflicted terrible wounds. A metal casque, ornamented with the horns of
the elk, buffalo, or stag, covered the head of the common soldier, that
of the rich warrior being adorned with flowing plumes, while figures of
birds or wild beasts were wrought upon the crest. The buckler was
covered with hideous figures. Beneath a breast-plate of wrought-iron the
warrior wore a coat of mail, the produce of Gallic industry. He further
adorned himself with necklaces; and the scarves of the chiefs glittered
with gold, silver, or coral. The standard consisted of a wild boar,
formed of metal or bronze, and fixed at the end of a staff.
The Gauls dwelt in spacious circular habitations, built of rough stones,
cemented together with clay, or composed of stakes and hurdles, filled
up with earth within and without. The roof, which was ample and solid,
was composed of strong planks cut into the form of tiles, and of stubble
or chopped straw kneaded with clay.
The wealthy Gaul, besides his town residence, possessed a country house.
His wooden tables were very low, and in them excavations were made which
answered the purpose of plates and dishes. The guests sat upon trusses
of hay or straw, upon hassocks formed of rushes, or forms with wooden
backs. They slept in a kind of press, formed of planks, similar to those
which are met with in some cottages of Brittany and Savoy. They had
earthen vessels, of delicate grey or black pottery, more or less
ornamented, and brazen vases. They used horns as drinking-vessels.
The Gauls ate little bread, but a great deal of roast or boiled meat. As
a rule, they tore with the teeth pieces which they held in their hands.
The poor drank beer, or other less costly beverages; the rich, aromatic
wines.
The beauty of the Gallic women was proverbial. The elegance of their
figure, the purity of their features, and the whiteness of their skins,
were universally admired. To captivate these fierce men they made
abundant use of coquetry. In order to heighten the freshness of their
complexions, they bathed themselves with the foam of beer, or chalk
dissolved in vinegar. They dyed their eyebrows with soot, or a liquid
extracted from a fish called _orphi_. Their cheeks they coloured with
vermilion, and dressed their hair with lime in order to make it blond,
and covering it with network, let it fall behind, or else turned it up
crestwise. They wore as many as four tunics, one above the other, veiled
their head with part of their cloak, and wore a mitre or Phrygian
head-dress.
Any ordinary person who died was interred in a manner suitable to their
sex and condition, with arrow-heads, hatchets, flint knives, necklaces,
rings, bracelets, articles of pottery, &c. The grave was marked by an
unhewn stone, which was surrounded with herbs, moss, or flowers. These
tombstones were raised up in the plains, by the way-side, and amid the
deep shade of the forests. They were guarded by a statue of Tentates,
one of whose cheeks was painted white, the other black.
When a chief died, his body was burnt. In order to do this, the body was
placed upon a pile of resinous wood, with his weapons of war and of the
chase, his charger and dogs, and sometimes even, his slaves. While the
flames devoured the body, the bystanders uttered loud cries, and the
warriors clashed their shields. The half-calcined bones were enclosed in
an urn of coarse earth, rudely ornamented with a few engravings or
figures in bas relief. This urn was then deposited beneath a tumulus
covered with turf. In southern Gaul it was placed beneath a funeral
column.
In order to render complete the idea which we should wish to convey of
the outward appearance of the Gauls, we must say a few words about the
Druids.
The Druids were the priests of the Gauls, a clergy powerful by reason of
their political duties and judicial functions. The Druids led a solitary
life in the depth of oak forests and in secluded caves. They wore a
distinctive dress, their robes reaching down to the ground. During
religious ceremonies they covered their shoulders with a species of
white surplice, and upon their pontifical dress was displayed a crescent
which had reference to the last phase of the moon. Their feet were
furnished with pentagonal wooden sandals; they allowed their hair to
grow long, and shaved off their beards. In their hand they carried a
sort of white wand, and suspended from their neck an amulet of oval
shape set in gold.
We said the Franks proceeded from the mixture of the Gauls with the
Iberian natives of the country, joined later on to the Romans, the
Greeks, and more recently still to the Alanians, the Goths, the
Burgundians, and the Suevians. Having spoken of the Gauls, we shall now
proceed to describe the Franks.
The Frank was tall in height, with a very white skin, blue sparkling
eyes, and a powerful voice. His face was shaven, save upon the upper
lip, which earned a heavy mustachio. His hair, of a beautiful blond
colour, was cut behind, and long in front. His dress was so short as not
to cover his knees, and fitted tightly, showing plainly the form of the
body. He wore a shoulder-belt, ornamented with nails, and plates of
silver or inlaid metal. From his girdle hung an iron knife, an axe with
short handle and heavy keen iron head (battle-axe), a very sharp
ponderous sword, and a pike of medium length, the stout point of which
was armed with several barbs or sharp teeth, turned back as in a
fish-hook. Before going to battle, the Frank dyed his hair red. The hair
itself was frequently held together by a golden net, or a copper
circlet; at other times he dressed himself with the spoils of wild
beasts.
[Illustration: 16.--DRUIDS, GAULS, AND FRANKS.]
We are able to extract from historical recitals an exact idea of the
Frankish woman. She was powerful, and wore a long robe of dark colour,
or bordered with purple. Her arms were left uncovered, and her head was
wreathed with flowering broom. Her looks, sometimes fierce, bespoke
masculine vigour and a character which did not shrink from sanguinary
conflict.
The Celtic and Iberian languages gradually disappeared among the Franks,
being replaced by Latin dialects.
The Gauls and Franks, who were subdued by the Romans, received into
their blood the Latin element, which rapidly increased. Restrained for a
while by the invasions of tribes from the north and east, by Asiatic
hordes of Mongolian race, among which we may name the Huns; the Latin
element again assumed the ascendant at the commencement of the sixteenth
century; men and manners, language and art, bore witness more and more
to Latin influence: the fair hair and white skin of the Frank
alternating with the black locks and brown skin of the Latin people.
Thus it is that the French lost the athletic frame and vigorous limbs of
the Gaul, gaining in their stead the suppleness and agility of southern
nations. Thus also the French language became gradually formed, modified
from Latin dialects.
The existence of a single written language renders it difficult to mark
the characteristic distinctions among the French of the present day. We
may however, distinguish the _French properly so called_, who inhabit
the lower district of the Loire, and whose dialects are most akin to the
written language; the _Walloons_, in the north, whose pronunciation
somewhat approaches that of Teutonic nations; and the _Romanians_, in
the south, where the dialects become confused with those of the
Spaniards and Italians. The French of the interior are those who most
resemble the Celts; those of the south possess the vivacity of the
ancient Iberians or Basques; and those of the north have suffered still
more from Teutonic influence, the effect of which is more especially
appreciable in Normandy.
Owing to the diversity of his origin, and the different races of men
which have been moulded into his type, not omitting also the effect
attributed to the great geological variety of the soil of France, where
samples of all parts of the earth are to be found, the Frenchman,
considered organically, possesses no peculiar physiognomy, which
nevertheless does not prevent the complete identification of his French
nationality.
From a physical point of view, and setting aside certain extremes, it
may be said that the Frenchman is characterised, not so much by special
features, as by the mobility and expression of these features. He is
neither large nor small, yet his body is in all respects well
proportioned; and although he may not be capable of developing great
muscular action, he is fully qualified to contend successfully against
fatigue and long journeys. Agile and nervous, as prompt in attack as in
parrying a blow, full of expedient, supple, and cheerful, skilful both
physically and morally, this is the character we shall easily recognise
in our typical soldier of the next page.
Considered intellectually, the Frenchman is distinguished by a readiness
and activity of conception which is truly unsurpassed. His comprehension
is quick and sound. A halo of feeling surrounds this intellectual
activity. Add to this a very fair amount of reason, solid judgment, and
a veritable passion for order and method, and you have the French
character.
To this combination of various qualities must be referred the respect
which the French nation entertain for science and art, the admirable
order which is found in their museums, and the excellent preservation of
their historical monuments. This also goes to explain their excellent
organization for public instruction, both in art and science, the
forbearing and kindly tone of their philosophy, which above all things
seeks the practical rules which govern human action, their excellent
judicial system and admirable civil code, which has been copied more or
less by all the nations of the New or Old Worlds.
Although the Frenchman respects science, loves the arts, and takes an
interest in the productions of thought, it must be admitted that he is
loth to take any personal part in them. He is glad to make use of the
practical applications of science, and gratefully acknowledges the
service they render him; but he shuns the idea of studying the sciences
as such, and the very name of _savant_ conveys to his mind a tiresome
person. The sciences, which at the end of the last century brought so
much honour to France, now languish. Scientific careers are avoided, and
in the country of Lavoisier, Laplace, and Cuvier, science is visibly on
the decline.
To make science palatable to French readers, the edge of the cup must be
coated with honey, and the preceptor must clearly comprehend what dose
of the sweetened beverage he may administer, so as not to overtax the
powers or present humour of his patient.
We may say the same of the liberal arts. The Frenchman takes delight in
artistic works, in fine monuments and buildings, costly statuary,
magnificent pictures, engravings, and all the productions of high art;
but he does nothing whatever to encourage them. France is at the present
day at the head of the fine arts, and her school of painting is without
a rival; and yet her artists, whether they be painters or sculptors,
must seek elsewhere an outlet for their talents.
In France, the people are content with rendering a formal homage to the
merit of their works of art, and leave to the government the task of
encouraging and propagating them.
This encouragement consists in an annual exhibition of their paintings
and sculptures, entry to this exhibition being obtained only by payment.
When it is over, the various works are returned to their authors, and
medals of different value assist the public to appreciate the excellence
of their productions.
In France, then, the people are, properly speaking, neither studious nor
artistic: they merely profess great esteem for the arts and sciences,
and render them homage without the least wish to know more of them or an
attempt to further their cultivation.
A very excellent quality of the French nation is its sociability. Whilst
the English and Germans shut themselves up in their houses with
misanthropical concern, the Frenchman prefers to share his dwelling, to
inhabit a sort of hive, in which the same roof shelters a large number
of individuals of all ages and conditions. He can thus perform and
exchange many services, and, while living his own form of existence,
enjoy that of others. See how, in French villages, the houses are
grouped together or placed back to back, or, in the large towns, those
houses where fifty lodgers hardly separated from one another by a scanty
partition, have one common domestic, the porter, and you will at one
recognize the instinct of sociability, and external affability, which is
peculiar to the French nation. The readiness which each manifests to
render the little services of life, to aid a wounded person, or assist
in extricating his neighbour from embarrassment, are all signs of the
same praiseworthy spirit of sociability.
[Illustration: 17.--FRENCHMAN.]
The delicacy of feeling and thought, the extraordinary taste for order
and method, and the love of art, which characterize the French nation,
are all to be encountered in their various industrial products. A
feeling for art is essentially characteristic of French industry, and
gives it that well-known good taste, distinction, and elegance, which
are so justly appreciated.
Although he is neither student nor artist, the Frenchman knows therefore
perfectly how to call science and art to his aid, demand their
co-operation and inspiration, and transfer them with advantage into
practice. Thanks to his instinct for order and method, he succeeds in
drawing material profit from studious or sentimental subjects.
Having considered the bright side of the French nation, we will now see
where they are deficient.
It is a recognized fact, that, among the French, one-third of the men
and more than half the women can neither read nor write: this is
equivalent to saying, that of the thirty-eight millions of individuals
composing the population of France, fifteen millions can neither read
nor write.
The French peasant does not read, and for a very good reason. On Sunday
he has read to him extracts from the Almanack of Pierre Larrivay, of
Matthieu Laensberg, or some other prophet of the same cloth, who
foretells what is about to happen on each day of the year; and this is
as much as he wants. La Bruyère drew of the French peasant in the time
of Louis XIV. a forcible and sinister picture, which in many cases is
true even at the present day: in the course of two centuries, the
subject has altered but little.[5]
[5] “We meet with certain wild animals, male and female, scattered
over the country, black, livid, and dried up by the sun, attached
to the soil which they turn and rummage about with an insuperable
obstinacy; they seem to utter articulate sounds, and when they get
upon their legs, show a human face. And in fact, these, it seems,
are men.”
The French artisan reads very little. Works of popular science, which
for some years past have happily been edited in France, are not read, as
is imagined, by the working classes: those who seek works of this class
are persons who have already received a certain amount of instruction,
which they desire to increase by extending it to other branches of
knowledge; these, for the greater part, include school-children, and
persons, belonging to the different liberal professions, or engaged in
commerce.
The bourgeois, who has some spare time, devotes a portion of it to
reading, but he does not read books. In France, books are objects of
luxury, used only by persons of refinement. The crowd, when they see a
man go by with a book under his arm, regard him with respectful
curiosity. Enter the houses, even those of the most wealthy, and you
will meet with everything which is necessary for the comforts of life,
every article of furniture which may be called for, but you will seldom
or never find a library. Whilst in Germany, England, and Russia, it is
thought indispensable, in France a library is almost unknown.
The French bourgeois reads only the papers. Unfortunately, French
journals have always been devoted to politics. Literature and art,
science and philosophy, nay, even commercial and current affairs, that
is, all which go to make up the life and interests of a nation, are
excluded with most jealous care from the greater part of the French
journals, to make way for political subjects. Thus it is that politics,
the most superfluous and barren of subjects, have become among the
French the great and only object of consideration.
The press which indulges in _light_ literature is much worse. Its
articles are founded on old compilations. The bons-mots of the Marquis
of Bièvre are borrowed from _Bièvriana_, and laid at the door of M. de
Tillancourt; then Mlle. X. des Variétés is made the heroine of an
anecdote borrowed from the _Encyclopediana_, and the trick is complete.
The paper is sold at a sou, and is not worth a liard.
The papers are the chief means by which the French bourgeois stuff their
heads with emptiness.
The weakness of instruction in France becomes still more apparent by
comparison with that of other nations. Traverse all Switzerland, and in
every house you will find a small library. In Prussia it is a most rare
matter to find a person who cannot read; in that country instruction is
obligatory. In Austria every one can read. In Norway and Denmark, the
lowest of the peasantry can read and write their language with accuracy;
while in the extreme north, in Iceland, that country given up to the
rigours of eternal cold, which is, as it were, a dead spot in nature,
prints are numerous. We need not say that the English and Americans are
far in advance of the French as regards instruction. Nay, more, all the
Japanese can read and write, as also all the inhabitants of China
proper.
Let us hope that this sad condition of things will change, when, in
France, gratuitous and obligatory instruction has become the law.
Uninstructed and unambitious of learning, timid artisan and plodding
husbandman though he be, the Frenchman has yet one ruling virtue. He is
a soldier; he possesses all the qualities necessary for war--bravery,
intelligence, quickness of conception, the sentiment of discipline, and
even patience when it is called for. If in 1870 a combination of
deplorable fatalities forced the French to yield to the dictates of a
people, who even yet wonder at their victory, the reputation of the
French soldier for bravery and intelligence has in no way suffered by
this unforeseen check. The day for revenge upon the barbarians of the
north will come sooner or later.
Another peculiarity of the French nation is their spirit of criticism
and satire. If, in the days of Beaumarchais, everything in France closed
with a song, nothing at the present day is complete without a joke.
There is nothing which the French spirit of satire has not turned to
ridicule. In the art of the pencil it has created _la charge_, namely,
the caricature of what is beautiful, and the hideous exaggeration of
every physical imperfection; on the stage it has introduced _la
cascade_, a public parody bringing before the audience in an absurd
manner, history, literature, and men of distinction; in the dance, it
has given birth to the obscene and nameless thing which is composed of
the contortions of fools, and which with strangers passes as a national
dance.
The French woman is perfectly gifted in what concerns intelligence; she
possesses a ready conception, a lively imagination, and a cheerful
disposition. Unfortunately, the burthen of ignorance presses sorely
upon her. It is a rare thing for a woman of the people to read, as only
those of the higher classes have leisure, during their girlhood, to
cultivate their minds. And yet even they must not give themselves up too
much to study, nor aspire to honour or distinction. The epithet _bas
bleu_ (blue stocking) would soon bring them back to the common crowd--an
ignorant and frivolous feminine mass. Molière’s lines in _Les Femmes
Savantes_, which for two centuries have operated so sadly in
disseminating ignorance throughout one half of French society, would be
with one voice applied to them.
With this ill-advised tirade, persons who think themselves perfectly
right, stifle the early inclinations of young girls and women, which
would induce them to open their minds to notions of literature, science,
and art.
A question was once put forward whether we should permit our young women
to share the education which the University affords to young men. We are
speaking of the courses which were to have been held by the college of
professors, according to the plans proposed by M. Duruy. But this
attempt at the intellectual emancipation of young girls was very soon
suppressed. Being barely tolerated at Paris, these courses were soon
interdicted in the departmental towns, and woman soon returned to the
knee of the church, or, in other words, was brought back to ignorance
and superstition.
This want of instruction in the French woman is the more to be
regretted, since, to an excellent intellectual disposition, she adds the
irresistible gifts of grace and physical charms. There is in her face a
seduction which cannot be equalled, although we can assign her
physiognomy to no determinate type. Her features, frequently irregular,
seem to be borrowed from different races; they do not possess that unity
which springs from calm and majesty, but are in the highest degree
expressive, and marvellously contrived for conveying every shade of
feeling. In them we see a smile, though it be shaded by tears; a caress,
though they threaten us; and an appeal when yet they command. Amid the
irregularity of this physiognomy the soul displays its workings.
As a rule, the French woman is short of stature, but in every proportion
of her form combines grace and delicacy. Her extremities and joints are
fine and elegant, of perfect model and distinct form, without a
suspicion of coarseness. With her, moreover, art is brought wonderfully
to assist nature.
There is no place in the world where the secret of dress is so well
understood as in France, or where means are so admirably applied to the
rectification of natural defects of form or colour. Add to this a
continual desire to charm and please, an anxious care to attract and
attach the hearts of others through simplicity or coquetry, good will or
malice, the wish to radiate everywhere pleasure and life, the noble
craving to awake grand or touching thoughts, and you will understand the
universal and charming rule which woman has always held in France, and a
great portion of the influence which she perforce retains over men and
things.
All these qualities, which distinguish the women of the higher classes
in France, are met with also among those of the working classes. Their
industrious hands excel in needlework. They make their own clothing, and
that of their children; look to the household linen, make their own
bonnets, and most effectually cause elegance and taste to thrive in the
heart of poverty. The correctness of their judgment, their tact and
delicacy, and their rare penetration, are of valuable assistance in
commercial matters, where their just appreciation affords most useful
aid to their husbands and children. In retail trade especially, do these
qualities shine forth--order, sagacity, and patience. Their politeness
and presence of mind charm the purchaser, who always finds what he
wants, and is always in good humour with himself and the articles he
obtains.
The French women excel in household duties and in bringing up their
children. These graceful and sweet young girls become mothers whose
patience is inexhaustible, and make of their home the most perfect
resting-place, and the best refuge from the sufferings and hardships of
life.
* * * * *
_Hispanians._--Under this name we include the Spaniards and Portuguese.
The Hispanians result from the mixture of the Latins, with the Celts,
whom they succeeded in Spain, and with the Teutons, who drove out the
Romans.
Washed on three sides by the sea, divided from France on the north by
the Pyrenees, and from Africa on the south by a narrow stretch of sea,
Spain is crossed by ranges of mountains, which, by their various
intersections, form valleys permitting only of difficult communication
with each other. The mountains of Spain are one of the principal causes
of the richness of this country. They contain a variety of precious
metals, and the streamlets which flow from their summits fertilize the
valleys and develop into large rivers.
[Illustration: 18.--CATTLE-DEALER OF CORDOVA.]
The climate of Spain indicates the vicinity of Africa. The air during
winter, is cold, dry, and sharp: during the summer it is scorching. The
leaves of the trees are stiff and shining, the branches knotty and
contorted, the bark dry and rugged. The fruits mingle with their perfume
a sharp and acid flavour: the animals are lean and wild.
Nature therefore in Spain is somewhat violent and rude, and this
characteristic is peculiar to the people of the country.
The Spaniard, like the African, is in general of moderate height. His
skin is brown, and his limbs are muscular, compact, and supple. In a
moral sense, passion with him obtains the mastery; indeed it is quite
impossible for him to master or dissemble his feelings. He is not afraid
to allow their workings to become evident, but, in their display, if
they meet with curiosity or admiration, he passes all bounds and becomes
a perfect spectacle. A Spaniard always allows his feelings to be plainly
perceptible.
This habitual weakness for scenic display which in a people possessing
evil instincts would be excessively inconvenient, produces in the
Spaniard the best results, since at heart he is full of generosity and
nobleness. It endows him with pride, from which spring exalted feelings
and good actions; emulation, which prompts him to outdo himself; a moral
tone, generosity, dignity, and discretion. Nowhere are better understood
than in Spain the regard due to age or sex, and the respect called for
by rank or position.
The love of distinction, place, and grade is an inevitable consequence
of this state of feeling.
The pride of the Spaniard renders him very tenacious as regards his
honour. He brooks not insult, and seeks to requite it with bloodshed.
His hand flies to the sword which is to avenge his honour, or the knife
which is to settle his disputes (fig. 19).
In Spain arms are carried by all, and their habitual contact--too much
neglected in other countries--imparts to each the desire for glory or
the hope of playing a leading part in the world.
Such being his disposition, the Spaniard cannot fail to make an
excellent soldier. Besides having taste and aptitude for the use of
arms, he is vigorous, agile, and patient; and therefore worthy to be
named honorably in comparison with the French soldier. It is, however,
difficult to preserve discipline among these fiery and independent men.
They are not always easy to command in time of regular warfare, and when
times become troublesome, they become rapidly converted into guerillas,
a term which is almost synonymous with brigand.
[Illustration: 19.--NATIVES OF TOLEDO.]
The use of arms being familiar to every Spaniard, there is a great
temptation to use them, and passion frequently creates an opportunity.
Therefore it is that Spain is essentially a land of civil war.
[Illustration: 20.--SPANISH PEASANT.]
On the most simple question arising, the peasant seizes his gun and
rushes to an ambuscade, or joins a band of insurgents.
[Illustration: 21.--A MADRID WINE-SHOP.]
Political insurrections are an amusement to this impressionable and
hasty people. In the twinkling of an eye bands of armed men overrun the
country. The great want of discipline among the soldiers and
non-commissioned officers, conduces to desertion to these irregular
bodies, and the result is that unhappy Spain is continually in a state
of local insurrection, the suppression of which invariably leads to
bloodshed without producing any permanent settlement.
The passion which a Spaniard evinces in all he does, is not wanting in
his religion. His piety is exalted, and the violence to which this piety
frequently leads him, has had mournful results. It is this religious
fury which accounts for the cruelty of the Spaniards to the Saracens and
Jews; and which, later on, lit the faggots of the Inquisition, and
produced the most savage intolerance. Spain has burnt, in the name of a
God of peace and love, thousands of innocent creatures; and for the
honour and good of the Catholic faith, has proscribed, strangled, and
tortured.
This passionate exaggeration of Catholicism has proved the ruin of Spain
in modern times. It is marvellous to see how this nation, so powerful in
the sixteenth century, and which, under Charles V., dictated laws to all
Europe, has fallen; until at the present day, it ranks among the states
of the lowest class in this part of the world. But it will be seen that
the multiplication of convents, both for men and women, has had the
effect of rapidly depopulating the country; that the proscription of the
Moors, the Jews, and lastly, of the Protestants, has proved destructive
of productive industry; that the courts of the Inquisition, and the
auto-da-fé, have led to a feeling of sadness and mistrust among the
people; that the abuse of religion and its symbols, has produced a
bigotry which can be likened only to idolatry; and that the fear of
offending an intolerant and self-asserting religion, has arrested all
moral progress, and effectually set aside all development of science,
which of necessity presupposes free investigation.
This is how progress, activity, and thought, have met with their end,
and how material prosperity has become extinguished in that portion of
Europe, most marvellously endowed with natural gifts. Thus it is that
commerce has become a bye-word in a land, whose geographical position is
unrivalled, and which possessed in the New World the most flourishing
and powerful colonies; and that literature and science, the two great
words which indicate liberty and progress, have fallen away in the home
of Michael Cervantes.
How is Spain to recover her former splendour? What remedies must be
applied to these crying evils? We reply, religious toleration, and
political liberty.
The type of the Spanish woman is so well known, that we need hardly
recall it. She is generally brunette, although the blond type occurs
much more frequently than is usually supposed. The Spanish woman is
almost always small of stature. Who has not observed her large eyes,
veiled by thick lashes, her delicate nose, and well-formed nostrils. Her
form is always undulating and graceful; her limbs are round and
beautifully moulded, and her extremities of incomparable delicacy. She
is a charming mixture of vigour, languor, and grace.
Love is the great object of the Spanish woman. She loves with passion
but with constancy, and the jealousy she feels is but the legitimate
compensation for the attachment she bestows.
The Spanish woman, faithful as a wife, is an excellent mother. Few women
can equal her as a nurse, or in the attention and patience which are
called for by the care of children. The mother lavishes upon her young
family her whole life, and if she fails to instruct them, it is, alas!
that she lacks the power to do so; for she is no better educated than
the French woman, and, as regards ignorance, is a meet companion for her
in every respect.
We have said that, in France, women exercise a very manifest influence
upon the course of events. The Spanish woman is not, however, in
possession of this useful influence. She commands the attention of those
around her only during the short period of her beauty. When, arrived at
maturity, her judgment formed by experience, and her views enlarged by
observation or practice, she might soothe the passion of her friends,
assist them with her counsel, or unite them around her hearth, the
Spanish woman retires into obscurity, and the knowledge she has gained
is lost to society.
Having thus given a general view of Spanish manners, we will say
something with respect to the most characteristic physiognomies of this
country.
[Illustration: 22.--SPANISH LADY AND DUENNA.]
The Moorish type is met with in a marked degree in the province of
Valencia. The peasants have swarthy complexions. Their head-dress
consists of a handkerchief in bright colours, rolled around the head and
rising to a point: strongly reminding the observer of the turban worn by
Eastern nations. They sometimes wear, in addition to this, a hat formed
of felt and black velvet, with the edges turned up. On fête-days they
don a waistcoat of green or blue velvet, with numerous buttons formed of
silver or plated copper. In lieu of trowsers, they wear full drawers of
white cloth, which reach as far as the knees, and are kept up by a broad
belt of silk or brightly striped wool. The hose consist of gaiters, kept
in place by means of a broad blue riband wound round the leg. A long
piece of woollen material, striped with bright colours, is thrown over
the shoulders or wound round the body: this is the cloak.
[Illustration: 23.--THE FANDANGO.]
The peasants are to be seen to best advantage in the market-place,
whither they bring their oranges, grapes, and dates.
The women of Valencia are sometimes of remarkable beauty. Their black
hair is rolled into bunches above the temples, and carried to the back
of the head, where it forms an enormous chignon, through which passes a
long needle of silver-gilt.
In some of the preceding cuts we have given the costumes of the
inhabitants of Valencia, Xeres, Cordova, Toledo, and Madrid, as also
types of Spanish physiognomy.
In Spain, dancing is a national feature. The dance scarcely varies in
different provinces, but generally reflects the character of the people,
who accompany it with songs and national melodies. They can hardly have
enough of singing and dancing the Fandango (fig. 23), and the Bolero
(fig. 24).
Portugal abuts on Spain, and its people merit some portion of our
consideration.
The Portuguese women are frequently pretty, and sometimes actually
beautiful. They have abundant hair, their eyes are earnest, soft, and
penetrating, and their teeth excellent. Their feet are rather large, but
their hands are very delicate. Their forms are well set, and strongly,
though somewhat sturdily built; their joints are small, their complexion
sallow, their movements are confident. Their well shaped heads are well
placed, and the modest ease with which they wear the short jupon and
broad felt hat, imparts to these articles of dress a certain elegance.
The inhabitants of Ponte de Lima are of small stature, and possess fine
vigorous forms. The country people are worthy of special notice, they
make brave and steady soldiers, who are easily amenable to discipline,
and robust and intelligent workmen.
[Illustration: 24.--THE BOLERO.]
There is nothing very noteworthy about the dress of the peasantry,
except as regards that of the women. The petticoat is plaited, short,
and sometimes rolled up, so as to expose to view their legs, which are
usually bare. The bodice, which is furnished with two or three silver
buttons, displays the form. Being separated from the petticoat, it
permits the chemise to puff out around the body, while the sleeves of
that garment are wide and usually worn turned up. The head-dress
consists of a large black felt hat, frequently adorned with bows of
ribbon, and almost always furnished with a white kerchief, the folds of
which fall down over the neck and shoulders. Long earrings, and even
necklaces and chains of gold, complete the picturesque costume in which
yellow, red, and bright green, predominate.
[Illustration: 25.--FISH-VENDORS AT OPORTO.]
The streets of Oporto are much enlivened by the appearance of the
peasants in their various brilliant dresses, who there vend oranges,
vegetables, cheese, or flowers.
Fig. 25 represents the costume of fishmongers at Oporto.
* * * * *
_Italians._ No part of Europe can be compared with Italy, for softness
of climate, clearness of the sky, fertility of the soil, and pureness of
the atmosphere. The soil, which is very undulating, is watered by
numerous streams, and permits largely of cultivation; while the
mountains conceal precious metals, and beautiful marbles. No country is
better protected by nature.
On the north arises a broad barrier of stupendous mountains, while the
remaining sides are protected by the sea. Along the coast are vast
ports, with good harbours; and lastly, this portion of Europe alone has
the advantage of offering ready access to both Asia and Africa.
The fertility of the soil, the mild temperature, and the large variety
of natural productions which furnish good food, all indicate that Italy
should possess a fine, vigorous, and intelligent population. And,
indeed, the Italians possess these qualities.
We shall first examine rather more closely, the origin of this people,
and the differences they present in various parts of the peninsula.
The Latin family which gave its name to the human group with which we
are now concerned, had Italy for its home. In Italy, therefore, we
should expect to meet with it. But we should be deceived were we to
expect to find the pure Latin type among the modern Italians. The
barbarian invasions in the north, and the contact with Greeks and
Africans in the south, have wrought much alteration in the primitive
type of the inhabitants of Italy. Except in Rome, and the Roman
Campagna, the true type of the primitive Latin population is hardly to
be found. The Grecian type exists in the south, and upon the Eastern
slope of the Apennines, while in the north, the great majority of faces
are Gallic. In Tuscany and the neighbouring regions are found the
descendants of the ancient Etruscans.
What most interests us is the primitive Latin population. This is met
with, as we have said, in and around Rome, and in order to find it we
must go there.
The features of the early Latin people can be imagined without
difficulty, by reference to busts of the first Roman emperors. We may
thence arrive at the following characteristic features, as probably
those of the ancient Italian races. The head is large, the forehead of
no great height, the vertex (summit of the cranium) flattened, the
temporal region protruding, and the face proportionally short. The
nose, which is divided from the forehead by a marked depression, is
aquiline; the lower jaw is broad, and the chin prominent.
[Illustration: 26.--ROMAN PEASANT GIRL.]
The modern population of Rome, without absolutely reproducing these
features, still retain their beautifully pure characteristic lines.
[Illustration: 27.--ROMAN PEASANTS.]
In fig. 27, which represents a group of peasant men and women of Rome,
we easily recognize these celebrated types of countenance, so familiar
to every artist. The distinguishing marks will be easily seen in the
Roman peasants, who, quitting their native country, seek their
livelihood in France as models.
[Illustration: 28.--YOUNG GIRL OF THE TRANSTEVERA.]
As one of these types taken from nature, we would call the reader’s
attention to fig. 28, which represents a young Roman girl from the
quarter on the banks of the Tiber called Transtevera, and also to fig.
29, which is a faithful portrait of peasants from around Rome.
It would be a fruitless task, were we, in studying the modern Romans, to
seek among them traces, more or less eradicated, of the old Roman blood.
In a population which has been so degraded, oppressed, and polluted as
this, by ages of slavery and obscurity, we should find nought but
disturbance and chaos. We can make no reference to family life in this
land of convents and celibacy, nor speak of intellectual faculties in a
country where we see a jealous tyranny narrowing the minds of the
inhabitants, and an authority that is seated in the blackest darkness,
moulding body and mind in ignorance of morality and education. We should
need the greatest power of penetration to find, in the effeminate and
degenerate population of Modern Rome, the genius of the ancient
conquerors of the world.
There are, however, reasons for hoping, that Rome, being now released
from Papal authority, and having, since the year 1871, become the
Capital of Italy and the residence of King Victor-Emmanuel, will
gradually cease to feel the preponderance of the sacerdotal element.
Young Romans playing the favorite Italian game, _la mora_, with its
usual accompaniment of gesticulations and shouts, is a very common
street scene. The two persons playing this game raise their closed fists
in the air, and then, in letting them fall, open as many fingers as they
may think proper. At the same time they call out some number. The winner
is he, who, by chance, calls out the number represented by the sum of
all the fingers exhibited by the two players. If, for example, I call
out _five_, and at the same time open two fingers, whilst my adversary
displays three, which added to mine make _five_, the number called by
me, I am winner. The arms of the two players are raised and lowered at
the same time, and the numbers are called simultaneously, with great
rapidity and regularity, producing a very singular result and one
incomprehensible to a stranger.
_La mora_ is played all over Italy.
But it is not alone in the city of Rome that the characteristic features
of the ancient Latin race are to be found; the traveller passing through
the suburbs of the capital of the Christian World, Frascati or Tivoli,
will still encounter vestiges of the old Latins hidden beneath the sad
garments of misery. (Fig. 29.)
[Illustration: 29.--STREET AT TIVOLI.]
It may be said that Rome at the present day is a vast convent. In it the
ecclesiastical population holds an important position and plays an
important part. This, it is, which imparts to the Eternal City its austerity, not to say,
its public sadness and moral languor. We shall therefore close our
series of picturesque views of the inhabitants of Modern Rome, by
glancing at the costumes of the principal dignitaries of the
ecclesiastical order, their representation in fig. 30 being followed by
the reproduction of a well-known picture, representing the _Exaltation
of Pio IX._ (fig. 31).
[Illustration: 30.--A CARDINAL ENTERING THE VATICAN.]
The Latin type, which physically if not morally is met with in a state
of purity at Rome, and in the Roman Campagna, has, on the other hand,
undergone great modification in the provinces of the North, as well as
in those of Southern Italy. Let us first consider the Northern
provinces.
Northern Italy, endowed to perfection with natural advantages, washed by
two seas, watered by the tributaries of a large river, possessing land
of extraordinary fertility, nourishes a race in which the Latin blood
has mingled with that of the German and Gaul. In Tuscany and the
neighbourhood are, as we have said, the descendants of the old
Etruscans, and further north are the offspring of Germanic and Gallic
races.
The designs which adorn the Etruscan sarcophagi, originally brought, it
is said, from Northern Greece, have preserved the physical form and
appearance of these people. They are bulky, and of heavy make.
The men wear no beard, and are clothed with a tunic which in some cases
is thrown over the back of the head. Some hold in the left hand a small
goblet, and in the right, a bowl. They repose in an easy posture,
resting the body on the left side, as do also the women. The women wear
a tunic, sometimes fastened below the breast by a broad girdle, which is
furnished with a circular clasp, and a peplum which in many cases covers
the back of the head. They hold in one hand an apple, or some fruit of
the same appearance, and in the other a fan. This is the portrait of the
Etruscan which has been handed down to us.
Tuscany, of all Italy, is that portion which most strongly represents
the mildness, the order, and the industrious activity of modern Italy.
The natural richness of the soil is there enhanced by a capable system
of cultivation. The arts peacefully flourish in this land of gr
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/41849