glad to have a skull of a Copt and a Fellah, and indeed of any other of the present tribes
in or bordering on Egypt, and which could be probably obtained through any one of your
medical friends in Cairo or Alexandria. I hope before you leave to be able to send you one
of the lithographs for my work, to prove to you. that it will be no discredit to the arts of
this country. Sensible how infinitely you may serve me in a favorite though novel inquiry,
I cannot but hope to interest your feelings and exertions on this occasion, and therefore
beg an early answer.”
To this letter Mr. (1. responded freely and cordially, readily undertaking
the commission, which resulted, in supplying Morton with
crania, which form the basis of his renowned Crania JEgyptiaca.
Without the aid thus afforded, any attempt to elucidate Egyptian
ethnology from this side the Atlantic would have been absurdly hopeless
; with it, a difficult problem was solved, and the opinion of the
scientific world rectified in an important particular. The correspondence
thus originated led to a close intimacy between the parties,
which essentially modified the history of both, and ended only with
life; and which resulted in a warmth of attachment, on the part of the
survivor, that even death cannot chill, as the dedication of this volume
attests. With the prospect of obtaining these Egyptian crania,
Morton was delighted. How much he anticipated appears from the
following passage in the preface to his Crania Americana;--—
“ Nor can I close this preface without recording my sincere thanks to George R. Gliddon,
Esq., United States Consul at Cairo, in Egypt, for the singular zeal with which he has promoted
my wishes in this respect; the series of crania he has already obtained for my use,
of many nations, both ancient and modern, is perhaps without a rival in any existing
collection; and will enable me, when it reaches this country, to pursue my comparisons on
an extended scale.” (p. 5.)' '
The skulls came to hand in the fall of 1840, and Morton entered
eagerly upon their examination, and upon the study of Nilotic
Archaeology in connection therewith. Mr. Gliddon arrived in January
1842, with the intention of delivering a course of lectures in this
country upon hieroglyphical subjects; and the two friends oould now
prosecute their studies together. They had already been engaged in
active correspondence, Morton detailing the considerations which
were impelling him to adopt views diverse, in several points, from what
were generally considered established opinions. I regret that I have
not access to the letters of Morton of this period, but the following
extract from a reply of Gliddon, dated London, Oct. 21st, 1841,
will show the state of their minds in regard to Egyptian questions at
that time :■—
“ With regard to your projected work, (Crania JEgyptiaca,) I will, with every deference,
frankly state a few evanescent impressions, which, were I with you, could be more fully
developed. I am hostile to the opinion of the African origin of the Egyptians. I mean
of the high caste—kings, priests, and military. The idea that the monuments support such
theory or the conclusion that they came down the Nile, or that ‘ Merawe’ is the Father of
Egypt is, I,think, untenable, and might be refuted. Herodotus’s authority, unless modif
i e d i n t^e way you mention, dark skinned and curly haired, is in this, as in fifty other instances,
quite insignificant. We, as hieroglyphists, know Egypt better now, than all the
Greek authors or the Roman. On this ground, unless you are convinced from Comparative
Anatomy, with which science I am totally unacquainted, and he backed by such evidence
as is incontrovertible, I urge your pausing, and considering why the ancient Egyptians
may not be of Asiatic, and perhaps of Arabic descent ; an idea which, I fancy, from the
tenor of your letters, is your present conclusion. At any rate, they are not, and never
were, Africans,, still less Negroes. Monumental evidence appears to overthrow the African
theory. . . •• . . • • ■ • • • Look at t*16 portraits of the kings of Egypt, in the plates of
Prof. Rosellini’s Monumenti Storici, and then read his 2d vol. text, at the end. They are facsimiles,
and is there anything African in. them, (excepting in the Amunoph family, where
this cross is shown and explained,)~until you oome down to the Ethiopian dynasty ? For
‘Merawe’ read Hoskins’s Ethiopia Ar it is a valuable work, but I differ in toto from his
chronology, or his connection between Egypt and ‘ Meroe’ ’down the Nile.
“ The Copts may be descendants of the ancient race, but so crossed and reerossed, as to
have lost almost every vestige of their noble ancestry. I should think it would be difficult,
with 100 skulls of Copts, to get at an exact criterion, they are so varied. Do not forget
also the effect of wearing the turban on the Eastern races, except the Fellahs, who seldom
can afford it, and wear a cap.
“ it has been the fashion to quote the Sphinx, as an evidence of the Negro tendencies
of ancient Egyptians. They take his wig for woolly hair — and as the nose is off, of course
it is flat. But even if the face (which I fully admit) has a strong African cast, it is an
almost solitary example, against 10,000 that are not African. We may presume from the
fact that the-tablet found on it bears the name of the 5th Thotmes—b . c. 1702—Rosellini,
No. 106—that it represents some king, (and most probably Thotmes 5th himself,) who, by
ancestral intermarriage, was of African blood. In fact, we find that Amunoph 1st—B. c.
1822 —■ and only five removes from this same Thotmes his successor, had an Ethiopian
wife— a black queen— ‘ Aahmes Nofreari.’ If the Sphinx were a female, I should at once
say it stood for ‘ Nofreari,’ who, as the wife of thè expeller of the Hykshos, was much
revered. The whole of the Thotmes and Amunoph branches had an African cast—vide
Amunoph 3d — almost a Nubian : but this cast is expressly given in their portraits, in
contradistinction to the aquiline-nosed and red Egyptians. Look at the Ramses family—
their men are quite Caucasian — their women are white, or only yellowish, but I can see
nothing African. I'wish I were by your side with my notes and rambling ideas — they
are crude, but under your direction could be licked into shape. The masses of facts are
extraordinary, and known but to very, very few. Unless a man now-a-days is a hierogly-
phist, and has studied the monuments, believe me, his authority is dangerous ; and but few
instances are there in which amongst the thousand-and-one volumes on Egypt, the work is not
a mere repetition or copy of the errors, of a preceding work— and this is but repeating what
the Romans never comprehended, but copied from the Greeks, who made up for their ignorance
then, as they do now, by lies. . All were deplorably ignorant on Egyptian matters.
Anything of the Champollion, Rosellini, and Wilkinson school for ancient subjects, is
safe — for the modern, there is only Lane. I mention these subjects just to arrest your
attention, before you take a leap ; though I have no doubt you leave no stone unturned.
Pardon my apparent officiousness, but I do this at the hazard of intruding, lest in your
earnest comparisons of ‘ Crania,’ you may not lay sufficient stress on the vast monumental
evidences of days of yore, and mean this only as a ‘ caveat.’ ”
But they soon found themselves in want of hooks, especially of
costly illustrated works. Hot only was it essential to verify quotations
hy reference to the text, hut the plates were absolutely indispensable.