The Moral and Intellectual Diversity of Races Part 21

I have seldom perused a work which has afforded me so much pleasure and instruction as the one of Count Gobineau, "_Sur l'Inegalite des Races Humaines_," and regard most of his conclusions as incontrovertible.

There are, however, a few points in his argument which should not be pa.s.sed without comment, and others not sufficiently elaborated. My original intention was to say much, but, fortunately for me, my colleague, Mr. Hotz, has so fully and ably antic.i.p.ated me, in his Introduction and Notes, as to leave me little of importance to add.

The essay of Count Gobineau is eminently practical and useful in its design. He views the various races of men rather as a historian than a naturalist, and while he leaves open the long mooted question of _unity_ of origin, he so fully establishes the _permanency_ of the actual moral, intellectual, and physical diversities of races as to leave no ground for antagonists to stand upon. Whatever _remote causes_ may be a.s.signed, there is no appeal from the conclusion that white, black, Mongol, and other races were fully developed in nations some 3000 years before Christ, and that no physical causes, during this long course of time, have been in operation, to change one type of man into another. Count Gobineau, therefore, accepts the _existing_ diversity of races as at least an _accomplished fact_, and draws lessons of wisdom from the plain teachings of history. Man with him ceases to be an abstraction; each race, each nation, is made a separate study, and a fertile but unexplored field is opened to our view.

Our author leans strongly towards a belief in the _original diversity_ of races, but has evidently been much embarra.s.sed in arriving at conclusions by religious scruples and by the want of accurate knowledge in that part of natural history which treats of the designation of _species_, and the laws of _hybridity_; he has been taught to believe that two distinct species cannot produce perfectly prolific offspring, and therefore concludes that all races of men _must_ be of one origin, because they are prolific _inter se_. My appendix will therefore be devoted mainly to this question of species.

A.

Our author has taken the facts of Dr. Morton at second hand, and, moreover, had not before him Dr. Morton's later tables and more matured deductions; I shall therefore give an abstract of his results as published by himself in 1849, with some comments of my own. The figures represent the internal capacity of the skull in cubic inches, and were obtained by filling the cavity with shot and afterwards pouring them into an accurately graduated measure.

It must be admitted that the collection of Morton is not sufficiently full in all its departments to enable us to arrive at the absolute capacity of crania in the different races; but it is sufficiently complete to establish beyond cavil, the fact that the crania of the white are much larger than those of the dark races. His table is very incomplete in Mongol, Malays, and some others; but in the white races of Europe, the black races, and the American, the results are substantially correct. I have myself had ample opportunities for examining the heads of living negroes and Indians of America, as well as a considerable number of crania, and can fully indorse Dr. Morton's results. It will be seen that his skulls of American aborigines amount to 338.

_Table, showing the Size of the Brain in Cubic Inches, as obtained by the Measurement of 623 Crania of various Races and Families of Man._

----------------------------------------------------------------------- | No. of | Largest | Smallest | | RACES AND FAMILIES. | skulls.| internal | internal | Mean.| Mean.

| | capacity.| capacity.| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- MODERN CAUCASIAN GROUP. | | | | | TEUTONIC FAMILY | | | | | Germans | 18 | 114 | 70 | 90 } English | 5 | 105 | 91 | 96 } 92 Anglo-Americans | 7 | 97 | 82 | 90 } PELASGIC FAMILY | | | | | Persians } | | | | Armenians } 10 | 94 | 75 | 84 | Circa.s.sians } | | | | CELTIC FAMILY | | | | | Native Irish | 6 | 97 | 78 | 87 | INDOSTANIC FAMILY | | | | | Bengalees, &c. | 32 | 91 | 67 | 80 | SHEMITIC FAMILY | | | | | Arabs | 3 | 98 | 84 | 89 | NILOTIC FAMILY | | | | | Fellahs | 17 | 96 | 66 | 80 | | | | | | ANCIENT CAUCASIAN GROUP.| | | | | PELASGIC FAMILY | | | | | Greco-Egyptians | 18 | 97 | 74 | 88 | (from Catacombs) | | | | | NILOTIC FAMILY | | | | | Egyptians | 55 | 96 | 68 | 80 | (from Catacombs) | | | | | | | | | | MONGOLIAN GROUP. | | | | | CHINESE FAMILY | 6 | 91 | 70 | 82 | | | | | | MALAY GROUP. | | | | | MALAYAN FAMILY | 20 | 97 | 68 | 86 } POLYNESIAN FAMILY | 8 | 84 | 82 | 83 } 85 | | | | | AMERICAN GROUP. | | | | | TOLTECAN FAMILY | | | | | Peruvians | 155 | 101 | 58 | 75 } Mexicans | 22 | 92 | 67 | 79 } BARBAROUS TRIBES | | | | } Iroquois } | | | } 79 Lenape } | | | } Cherokee } 161 | 104 | 70 | 84 } Shoshone, &c. } | | | | | | | | | NEGRO GROUP. | | | | | NATIVE AFRICAN FAMILY | 62 | 99 | 65 | 83 } AMERICAN-BORN NEGROES | 12 | 89 | 73 | 82 } 83 HOTTENTOT FAMILY | 3 | 83 | 68 | 75 | ALFOREAN FAMILY | | | | | Australians | 8 | 83 | 63 | 75 | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Morton's mind, it will be seen by this table, had not yet freed itself from the incubus of artificial and unnatural cla.s.sifications.

Like Tiedemann and others, he has grouped together races which have not the slightest affinity in physical, moral, or linguistic characters. In the _Caucasian_ group, for example, are placed the Teutonic, Indostanic, Shemitic, and Nilotic families, each of which, it can be shown, has existed utterly distinct for 5000 years, not to mention many subdivisions.

The table of Dr. Morton affords some curious results. His ancient Pelasgic heads and those of the modern white races, give the same size of brain, viz: 88 cubic inches; and his ancient Egyptians and their modern representatives, the Fellahs, yield the same mean, 80 cubic inches; the difference between the two groups being 8 cubic inches.

These facts have a strong bearing on the question of _permanence_ of types. The small-headed Hindoos present the same cranial capacity as the Egyptians, and though these races have each been the repository of early civilization, it is a question whether either was the originator of civilization. The Egyptian race, from the earliest monumental dawn, exhibits Shemitic adulteration; and Latham proves that the Sanscrit language was not indigenous to India, but was carried there from Northern Europe in early ages by conquerors.

Again, in the negro group, while it is absolutely shown that certain African races, whether born in Africa, or of the tenth descent in America, give a cranial capacity almost identical, 83 cubic inches; we see, on the contrary, the Hottentot and Australian yielding a mean of but 75 inches, thereby showing a like difference of eight cubic inches.

In the American group, also, the same parallel holds good. The Toltecan family, the most civilized race, exhibit a mean of but 77 inches, while the barbarous tribes give 84, that is, a difference of 7 inches in favor of the savage. While, however, the Toltecans have the smaller heads, they are, according to Combe, much more developed in the anterior or _intellectual_ lobes, which may serve to explain this apparent paradox.

When we compare the highest and lowest races with each other, the contrast becomes still more striking, viz: the Teutonic with the Hottentot and Australian. The former family gives a mean capacity of 92 inches, while the latter two yield but 75, or a difference of _17 cubic inches_ between the skulls of these types!

Now, as far back as history and monuments carry us, as well as crania and other testimonies, these various types have been _permanent_; and most of them we can trace back several thousand years. If such permanence of type through thousands of years, and in defiance of all climatic influences, does not establish _specific_ characters, then is the naturalist at sea without a compa.s.s to guide him.

These facts determine clearly the arbitrary nature of all cla.s.sifications heretofore adopted; the Teuton, the Jew, the Hindoo, the Egyptian, &c., have all been included under the term _Caucasian_; and yet they have, as far as we know, been through all time as distinct in physical and moral characters from each other, as they have from the negro races of Africa and Oceanica. The same diversity of types is found among all the other groups, or arbitrary divisions of the human family.

Rich and rare as is the collection of Dr. Morton, it is very defective in many of its divisions, and it occurred to me that this deficiency might to some degree be supplied by the hat manufacturers of various nations; notwithstanding that the information derived from this source could give but one measurement, viz: the _horizontal periphery_. Yet this one measurement alone, on an extended scale, would go far towards determining the general size of the brain. I accordingly applied to three hat dealers in Mobile, and a large manufacturer in New Jersey, for statements of the relative number of hats of each size sold to adult males; their tables agree so perfectly as to leave no doubt as to the circ.u.mference of the heads of the white population of the United States.

The three houses together dispose of about 15,000 hats annually.

The following table was obligingly sent me by Messrs. Vail & Yates, of Newark; and they accompanied it with the remark, that their hats were sent princ.i.p.ally to our Western States, where there is a large proportion of German population; also that the sizes of these hats were a little larger (about one fourth of an inch) than those sold in the Southern States. This remark was confirmed by the three dealers in Mobile. Our table gives, 1st. The number or size of the hat. 2d. The circ.u.mference of the head corresponding. 3d. The circ.u.mference of the hat; and lastly, the relative proportion of each No. sold out of 12 hats.

Size--inches. Circ.u.m. Circ.u.m. Relative of head. of hat. prop. in 12.

6-7/8 21-5/8 22-3/8 1 7 22 22-3/4 2 7-1/8 22-3/8 23-1/8 3 7-1/4 22-3/4 23-1/2 3 7-3/8 23-1/8 23-7/8 2 7-1/2 23-1/2 24-1/4 1

All hats larger than these are called "extra sizes."

The average size, then, of the crania of white races in the United States, is about 22-1/2 inches circ.u.mference, including the hair and scalp, for which about 1-1/2 inches should be deducted, leaving a mean horizontal periphery, for adult males, of 21 inches. The measurements of the purest Teutonic races in Germany and other countries, would give a larger mean; and I have reason to believe that the population of France, which is princ.i.p.ally Celtic, would yield a smaller mean. I hope that others will extend these observations.

Dr. Morton's measurements of aboriginal American races, give a mean of but 19-1/2 inches; and this statement is greatly strengthened by the fact that the Mexicans and other Indian races wear much smaller hats than our white races. (See _Types of Mankind_, p. 289 and 453.)

Prof. Tiedemann, of Heidelberg, a.s.serts that the head of the negro is as large as that of the white man, but this we have shown to be an error.

(_Types of Mankind_, p. 453.)

Tiedemann adopted the vulgar error of grouping together under the term _Caucasian_, all the Indo-Germanic, Shemitic, and Nilotic races; also all the black and dark races of Africa under the term _Negro_. Now I have shown that the Hindoo and Egyptian races possess about 12 cubic inches less of brain than the Teutonic; and the Hottentots about 8 inches less than the Negro proper. I affirm that no valid reason has ever been a.s.signed why the Teuton and Hindoo, or Hottentot and Negro, should be cla.s.sed together in their cranial measurements. I can discover no facts which can a.s.sign a greater age to one of these races than another; and unless Professor Tiedemann can overcome these difficulties, he has no right to a.s.sume ident.i.ty for the various races he is pleased to group under each of his arbitrary divisions. Mummies from the catacombs, and portraits on the monuments, show that the heads of races on both sides of the Red Sea have remained unchanged 4000 years.

As Dr. Morton tabulated his skulls on the same arbitrary basis, I abandon his arrangement and present his facts as they stand in nature, allowing the reader to compare and judge for himself. The following table gives the _internal capacity_ in cubic inches, and it will be seen that the measurements arrange themselves in a sliding scale of 17 cubic inches from the Teuton down to the Hottentot and Australian.

_Internal Capacity of Brain in Cubic Inches._

RACES. Internal Internal capacity. capacity.

Mean. Mean.

MODERN WHITE RACES-- Teutonic group 92 92 Pelasgic " 84 } Celtic " 87 } 88 Shemitic " 89 } ANCIENT PELASGIC 88 MALAYS 85 } 83-1/2 CHINESE 82 } NEGROES (AFRICAN) 83 83 INDOSTANESE 80 } FELLAHS (modern Egyptians) 80 } 80 EGYPTIANS (ancient) 80 }

AMERICAN GROUP-- Toltecan family 77 } 79 Barbarous tribes 84 }

HOTTENTOTS 75 } 75 AUSTRALIANS 75 }

Such has been, through several thousand years, the incessant commingling of races, that we are free to admit that absolute accuracy in measurements of crania cannot now be attained. Yet so constant are the results in contrasting groups, that no unprejudiced mind can deny that there is a wide and well-marked disparity in the cranial developments of races.

B.

As the discussion stands at the present day, we may a.s.sume that the scientific world is pretty equally divided on the question of unity of the human family, and the point is to be settled by facts, and not by names. Natural history is a comparatively new and still rapidly progressing science, and the study of man has been one of the last departments to attract serious attention. Blumenbach and Prichard, who may be regarded among the early explorers in this vast field, have but recently been numbered with the dead; and we may safely a.s.sert that the last ten years have brought forth materials which have shed an entirely new light on this subject.

Mr. Aga.s.siz, Dr. Morton, Prof. Leidy, and many other naturalists of the United States, contend for an original diversity in the races of men, and we shall proceed to give some of the reasons why we have adopted similar views. Two of the latest writers of any note on the opposite side are the Rev. Dr. Bachman, of Charleston, and M. Flourens, of Paris; and as these gentlemen have very fully travelled over the argument opposed to us, we shall take the liberty, in the course of our remarks, to offer some objections to their views.

The great difficulty in this discussion is, to define clearly what meaning should be attached to the term _species_; and to the ill.u.s.tration of this point, mainly, will our labors be confined.

_Genera_ are, for the most part, well defined by _anatomical_ characters, and little dispute exists respecting them; but no successful attempt has yet been made to designate _species_ in this way, and it is by their _permanency of type alone_, as ascertained from written or monumental records, that our decision can be guided.

SPECIES.

The following definitions of species have been selected by Dr. Bachman, and may be received as unexceptionable as any others; but we shall show that they fall far short of the true difficulties of the case.

"We are under the necessity of admitting the existence of certain forms, which have perpetuated themselves, from the beginning of the world, without exceeding the limits prescribed: all the individuals belonging to one of these forms const.i.tute a _species_."--CUVIER.

"We unite under the designation species all those individuals who mutually bear to each other so close a resemblance as to allow of our supposing that they may have proceeded originally from a single being, or a single pair."--DE CANDOLLE.

"The name species is applied to an a.s.semblage of individuals which bear a strong resemblance to each other, and which are perpetuated with the same essential qualities. Thus man, the dog, the horse, const.i.tute to the zoologist so many distinct species."--MILNE EDWARDS and ACHILLE COMPTE.

We have no objection to this definition, but the examples cited are points in dispute, and not received by many of the leading naturalists of the day.