Читать книгу The Human Race - Figuier Louis - Страница 2

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.