O ceanic R aces.
Geographer divide our globe into Europe, Asia, Africa, America,
an<^ 9 f ean*ca' This last region has been subjected to many systematic
divisions by different writers; but M. Jacquinot’s are both simple
and comprehensive: —
“ 1. Australia—embraces New Holland, and Tasmania or Van Diemen’s Land.
“ 2- PQi-'s’iiEsia.—all the islands of the Pacific Ocean, from the west coast of America to
the Philippines, and the Moluccas; comprising what hare been termed Micronesia and
Melanesia.
“ 3. Malaysia, or East Indies—Indian Archipelago; containing the Sunda, Philippine and
Molucca Islands.”
The three divisions together are termed Oceanica; and the races of men distributed over
this vast area present an infinite diversity of types, which have also been variously classified.
Prichard very justly remarks that these Oceanic types differ so much among each
other, and from the inhabitants of the Old and New World, that it is now impossible to
trace their o r ig in .4 9 5
[Ethnographic knowledge of the whole of them does not antedate the sixteenth century.
Thus, the existence of Malay tribes was unknown to Europe before their discovery by Lopez
de Sequeira, in a . d . 1510, followed by Albuquerque about 1513. Micronesiam were first
seen by Ferdinand Magelhaens in 1520; Polynesians by Rny Lopez de Villalobos in 1543,
and by Alvaro de Mendana in 1595: while Abel Jansen Tasman, in 1642-3, sailed around
Van Diemen’s Land, seeing “ no people, but some smoaks,” and afterwards had some of his
men killed by natives of New Zealand—which seems to be the first historic notice of Australian
families. When we recollect that the second “ voyage around the world” was not
undertaken by Francis Drake before the year 1557,«6 it will be comprehended at Once how
very recent is the information which ethnology possesses of Malayan, Polynesian, and
Australian types; whose separate existence, nevertheless, must be as ancient as that of the
animals and plants of their respective provinces of creation. G. R. G.l
As every classification of tbese races is wholly arbitrary, and inasmuch
as any attempts at emendation would here be futile, I shall
merely select for illustratibn a few of their more prominent types.
We have shown, from the monuments of Egypt and .other sources’
that various distinct races of men stood, face to face, 6000 years ago,
and that no physical causes have since transformed one type into another.
We may, therefore, reasonably assume that these Oceanic
races have ever been contemporary with others elsewhere, and were
created where originally found by modern navigators. There is a
more or less intimate connection, it is said, among most of the
Polynesian tongues; but the Australian, whose ,type is altogether
peculiar, Prichard declares, “ is the only one whose language is known
to be distinct.” j
Australians.
Australia comprises such immense superficies as to deserve the name of a continent; and,
consequently, its inhabitants present considerable $versity of types. This is inferred from
the contradictory accounts of travellers, who have described them at different geographical
points. It shonld be remarked, that the natives of Australia, Van Diemen’s Land New
Ouinea, and some other of these islands, although differing in many particulars, are'aU so
black in complexion as to have been termed Oceanic Negroes. They partake of the cranial
conformation of African Negroes; displaying, like them, harrow, elongated heads, defective
foreheads, small internal capacity, projecting jaws, &c.
Capt. W i l k e s , commander of the late ü. S. Exploring Expedition, thus describes them :—
“ The natives of Australia differ from any other race of men in features, complexion,
habits, and language. Their color and features assimilate them to the African type : their
long, black, silky hair has a resemblance to the Malays. The natives are of middle height,
perhaps a little above it ; they are slender in make, with long arms and legs. The cast of
the face is between the African and the Malay; the forehead unusually narrow and high ;
the eyes small, black, and deep-set ; the nose much depressed at the upper part, between
the eyes, and widened at the base, which is done in infancy by the mother, the natural
shape being of an aquiline form ; the cheek-bones are high, the mouth large, and furnished
with strong, well-set teeth ; the chin frequently retreats ; the neck is thin-and short. The
color usually approaches a deep umber, or reddish-black, varying much in* shade ; and individuals
of pure blood are sometimes as light-colored as mulattoes. Their most striking
distinction is their hair, which is like that of dark-haired Europeans, although more silky.
It is fine, disposed to curl, and gives them a totally different aspect from the African, and
also from the Malay and American Indian. Most of them have thick beards and whiskers,
and they are more hairy than the whites.”
J a c q u i n o t , of the French Exploring Expedition, gives a very similar description, except
that “ leur couleur était d’un noir fuligineux assez intense.” 497
M. d e F r e y c i n e t , who passed considerable time at different points of the country, describes
these tribes in the same manner. He says : “ The people everywhere assimilate.
Their color varies from intense black to reddish black. Their hair is invariably black and
smooth, though undulating, and never has the woolly appearance seen in other races.” 498
F ig. 279.499 F ig. 280.500
Australian. Australian.
“ This man (Fig. 279)
self killed two savages
of a hostile tribe, a. d .
1841. His skull (adds
Morton) is the nearest
approach to the orang
type that I have seen.
AStat. 40. J. C. 81.”
Fig. 281 is from la
Baie Raffle, coast of
New Holland; taken
from the Atlas of Du-
moutier.
whose name was Durabub, was killed in a fray, after having him-
F ig. 282.502
F ig. 281.501
Native of New Holland. Native of the Island of Timor.