All obstacles to the appreciation of what we mean by “ Mongolian Origin,” in the theory
of human graphical development, being now removed, but a few paragraphs are necessary
to elucidate that section of the General Table devoted to
3d. AMERICAN ORIGIN.—To another department of “ Types of Mankind” belongs the
argumentative exhibition of those data, whereby the aboriginal groups of American humanity
are disconnected from other centres of creation [supra, Chap. IX]. The purposes of
our tableau are served by reference to Morton for the cfaniological, to Gallatin for the
pjiiiologicai, and to Squier for the archceological bases of disoussioh.
It is unnecessary to reiterate the emphatio disclaimers of Dr. Morton, concerning any
recognition by himself of such notions as an exotic origin for American Indians. Dr. Patterson’s
Memoir [supra, pp. xlvi-xlix] and our various .Chapters [VII. p. 232 ; IX. p. 276 ;
X. pp. 305-307', 324-326] have removed from Morton’s cherished memory any further
attributions to him of these philosophical heresies. (305)
The total segregation of American aborigines from other types of man throughout the
rest of our globe, deduced in the present volume from the former’s osteological peculiarities,
animal propensities, geographical constitution, and what of history has been made/or
Indian nations by post-Columbian foreigners, results equally from the matured philology
of Gallatin.
“ I beg leave once more to repeat that, unless we suppose that which we have no right
to do, a second miraculous interposition of Providence in America, the prodigious number
of American languages, totally dissimilar in their vocabularies, demonstrates not only that
the first peopling of America took place at the earliest date which we are permitted to
assume, but also that the great mass of existing Indian nations are the descendants of, the
first [imaginary] emigrants; since we.must otherwise suppose that America was
by one hundred different tribes, speaking languages totally dissimilar m their nature. (30b)
Dr. Young it was who first.made languages the subject of mathematical calculation : —
I It appears, therefore, that nothing could be inferred with respect to the relation of two
languages, from the coincidence of the sense of any given word in both of them ; and that
the odds would be three to one against the agreement of two words; but if three words
appear to be identical, it would then be more than ten to one that they must be denvpd m
both cases from some parent language, or introduced in some other manner ; uix words
would give more than- seventeen hundred chances to one, and eight near one hundred thousand
; so that, in these cases, the evidence would be little short of absolute cer-
tainty.” {307)
. Comparative philology now recognizes the grammatical structure of tongues as the sole
criterion,-which point we have explained in its proper place ; but those whose minds have
been led astray by the plausible application of arithmetical formulae' to the chances of intercourse
between ante-Columbian American nations and the aborigines of Europe, Asia,
Africa or Australasia—based upon vocabularies said to be coincident in about one hundred
and eighty words'— would do well to ponder upon the fiat of the greatest archaeologist of
our generation, Letronne : —
; “ Profound mathematicians have essayed, principally since Condorcet, to apply the calculus
of probabilities to questions of moral order, and above all to the divers degrees ot
certitude in historical facts. They have flattered themselves upon ability to calculate how
much might be bet against one, that a given event had or had not happened. ’ UDior-
tunately, they have not seen that such a probability can yield but a result chimerical an
illusory. In no case could it replace that conviction, intimate, absolute, admitting neither
more nor less, which the examination of the diversified circumstances accompanying a iea
event produces. To those who may yet preserve any confidence in this abusive employment
of mathematical analysis, I would venture thé counsel that they should undertake to
find out through calculation, what new chance of probability is added by the fortuitous
discovery of all these contemporaneous testimonies [such as Squier has disinterred from
the primeval mounds of the West] which seem to emerge from the earth expressly to con-
. (305) The substance of our remarks appeared, under the heading of «The Progress of Knowledge versus the
Increase of Crime,” in the New Orleans Picayune, June 12 and 19,1853; signed G. R. G.
(306) American Civilization: Trans. Amer. Amer. Ethnol. Soc.; 1845; i. p. 1/9.
’ (307) Experiments on the Pendulum: Philos. Trans.; London, 1819 ; p. 7.
firm history. They will feel, I think, the uselessness, the vanity of their efforts; because
that which results naturally from this unexpected accord, is not one of those definite probabilities
estimable in numbers and in ciphers; it is a complete certitude which, with irresistible
force, takes possession of every mind that is honest and exempt from prejudice.
» (308)
Not a solitary point of identity which cannot, at a glance, be explained by the rule —
that similar causes operating upon similar principles produce everywhere the same effects—
exists between the sculptured and architectural monuments of the Old World and those of
the New, as known in 1853 to archaeologists: not a tongue, habit,-custom, mythe or idea
found among the aborigines of America by Columbus, can be traced back to any anterior
communication with other inhabitants of our planet. The real differences, moreover, in
the. geological constituents, the fauna, the flora, and the entire range of physical nature
whence American man drew his artistic models, preponderate infinitely over those partial
resemblances which, when not caused by the circumscribed necessities of all human things,
are simply accidental—if accidents can occur in the organic laws of creative power.
Take up the works of Squier. (309) What relic of art, what natural object, what human
or non-human thing, unearthed from those forest-clad mounds, is not solely and exclusively
American ? Run your finger along the map from the sub-polar limit of the Esquimaux
down to the Terra del Euego, and where, in published designs, of respectable authenticity,
can you point out a fact, in native human economy, anterior to the fifteenth century after
Christ, that compels your reason to travel off the American continent for its origin ? We
cannot find, at this day, pretensions to any but one. There is nothing, earnestly insists
“Air. Squier, (310) even in the most curious of all mythological coincidences yet discovered
between the Old and,New Hemispheres, viz: the “ serpent worship,” that necessarily drives
an archaeologist away from this continent for explanation: the very figurative expression
of this American mythe is, “ ab ovo,” a rattlesnake! Mr. Squier’s subsequent pursuits in
Europe (311) have opened, he tells us.personally, hopeful prospects of filling up some gaps
between tribes of Indians still extant and the Azteq and Tolteq scribes of ancient Mexico.
He is now in Central America exploring untrodden ground; and may he succeed in his
indefatigable restorations.
The possibility of Malayan, Polynesian, Japanese, or other shipwreck on the American
Pacific CQasts, having been established by such accident within our generation, is not disputed
; but there are three common-place reasons that militate against the probability that
contingencies of this sporadic nature had any the slightest influence in stocking this continent
with its groups of Indian aborigines: 1st. No memento of any similar event exists in
the speech, semi-civilization, art, or mythe, of the American world to induce such hypothesis;
which originates simply in evangelical cravings — European fathers “ qf that
thought.” Nor, were it proven, could such petty accident establish intercoursebecause
these ancient castaways never returned home again; and (still stranger to relate) there are
»no “ Indians ” in the countries whence originaHy they sailed. 2d. In the ratio that antiquity
is claimed for such a supposititious chance, so, owing to proportionate diminution of
human navigatory ability, the physical possibilities of its occurrence become “ fine by degrees,
and beautifully less.” 3d. As Morton long ago declared, “ If the Egyptians, Hindoos,
or Gauls have ever, by accident or design, planted colonies in America,* these must
have been, sooner or later, dispersed and lost in the waves of a vast indigenous population;”
so that, Indians existing before the arrival of such metaphorical colonists, the old
difficulty remains.
Of Irish or Welsh “ Indians” it will be time enough to speak, when their “ coprolites”
we dare not say their historical vestiges — are found, not merely on this continent, but
west of the European “ Ultima Thule ” of established Celto-maniac migrations.
(308) Recu&ii des Inscriptions Grecgues et Latines de VEgypte: 1842; i., Introd., p. 63.
(309) Observations on the Aboriginal Monuments o f the Mississippi Valley: New York, 1847; — Ancient Monuments
of the Mississippi Valley: 1848; and, besides fragmentary papers, Nicaragua: 1852.
(310) American Archaeology: «The Serpent Symbol;” 1851; pp. 170,171.
(311) Sketched in the New York Tribune: 24 Nov. 1852.