of the infancy of man and of his first footsteps upon earth, they present us with the only
remains of nations who reared no columns nor monuments to record their existence. In
these poor relics lie all their history, all their religion: and from these few rude hieroglyphics
must We evoke their existence and the revelation of their customs. If we were engaged
with Egyptians, Greeks, or Romans, people who have furnished us with chefs-d’oeuvre
which still serve as our models, it would he irksome to examine the ancient oak to find
whether it had fallen before the tempest or the axe, or to argue whether the angle of a
stone had been smoothed by the hand of man or the action of running water. But when
the soil we explore has no other signs of intelligent life, and the very existence of a people
* is in question, every vestige becomes history. It is easy to conceive that of all the works
of man in those ancient deposits, only such instruments of stone should remain. They
alone were able to resist the action of time and decomposition, and above all of the waters
which put the whole in motion. All these flints bear marks of mutual concussion and incessant
friction, which silex alone could have resisted..; The time when they were deposited where
we now find them, was no doubt that of the formation of the bank itse lf: it must be separated
from our epoch by an immense period, perhaps by many revolutions; and of all the
monuments known upon earth, these are doubtless the most ancient.” w. tr.
C H A P T E R XI I .
HYBKIDITY OF ANIMALS, VIEWED. IN CONNECTION WITH THE
NATURAL HISTORY OF MANKIND.
[By J. C. N.]
T h e subjects embraced in tbis and the succeeding Chapter appertaining
more to my individual studies than the rest, the reader will
perceive that I generally speakin the first person ; at the same time
that every recognition is due to my colleague (G-. R. Gr.) for material
aid in the archaeological department. Without further preface let
me remark, that the importance of Hybridity begins to be acknowledged
by all anthropologists; because, however imposing the array
of reasonings, drawn from other sources, in favor of the plurality of
origin, may seem, yet, so long as unlimited prolificness, inter ge, of two
races of animals, or of mankind, can be received by naturalists as
evidence of specific affiliation, or, in other words, of common origin,
every other argument must be abandoned as illusory.
We are told that, when two distinct species are brought together,
they produce, like the ass and the mare, an unprolific progeny; or,
at most, beget offspring which are prolific for a few generations and
then run out. It is further alleged, that each of our own domestic
animals (such as horses, dogs, cattle, sheep, goats, hogs, poultry, &c.)
is derived from a single Mesopotamian pair; and that the varieties
of these, springing up spontaneously in diverse climates differ as
widely as do the races of men. Hence an argument is deduced in
favor of the common origin of mankind. The grand point at issue
is here fairly presented: hut reasons exist for dissenting from the
above foregone conclusions.
In 1842 I published a short essay on Hybridity, the object of which
was, to show that the White Man and the Hegro were distinct “ species
illustrating my position by numerous facts from the Natural
History of Man and that of the lower animals. The question, at that
time, had not attracted the attention of Dr. Morton. Many of my
facts and arguments were new, even to him; and drew from the great
anatomist a private letter, leading to the commencement of a friendly
correspondence, to me, at least, most agreeable and instructive, and
which endured to the close of his useful career.
In the essay alluded to, and several which followed it at short intervals,
I maintained these propositions: —
1. That mulattoes are the shortest-lived of any class of the human race.
2. That mulattoes are intermediate in intelligence between the blacks and the whites.
3. That they are less capable of undergoing fatigue and hardship than either the blacks
or whites.
4. That the mulatto-women aré peculiarly delicate, and subject to a variety of chronic
diseases. That they are bad breeders, bad nurses, liable to abortions, and that their children
generally die young.
5. That, when mulattoes intermarry, they are less prolific than when crossed on the
parent stocks.
6. That, when a Negro man married a white woman, the offspring partook more largely
of the Negro type than when the reverse connection had effect.
7. That mulattoesf like Negroes, although unacclimated, enjoy extraordinary exemption
from yellow-fever when brought to Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, or New Orleans.
Almost fifty years of residence among the white and black races,
spread in nearly equal proportions through South Carolina and Alabama,
and twenty-five years’ incessant professional intercourse with
both, have satisfied me of the absolute truth of the preceding deductions.
My observations, however, during the last few years, in Mobile
and at Hew Orleans, where the population differs essentially from
that of the Horthern Atlantic States, have induced some modification
of my former opinions; although still holding to their accuracy so
far as they apply to the intermixture of the strictly white race (*. e. the
Anglo-Saxon, or Teuton,) with the true Negro. I stated in an article
printed in “ De Bow’s Commercial Review,” that I had latterly seen
reason to credit the existence of certain “ affinities and repulsions"
among various races of men, which caused their blood to mingle
more or less perfectly; and that, in Mobile, Hew Orleans and Pensacola,
I had witnessed many examples of great longevity among