I t may then he truly said, that we possess no data by which science
can at all approximate to the epoch of man’s first appearance upon
earth; for, as shown in our chronological essay, even the Jewish
history, whose fabulous chronology is so perseveringly relied on by
many, does not reach back to the early history of nations. It cannot
now reasonably be doubted, that Egypt and China, at least, existed
as nations 3000 years before Christ; and there is monumental evidence
of the simultaneous existence of various Types of Mankind quite as
far hack. Inasmuch as these types are more or less fertile inter se,
and as they have, for the last 5000 years, been subjected to successions
of wars, migrations, captivities, intermixtures, &c., it would he a vain
task at the present day to attempt the unravelling of this tangled
thread, and to make anything like a just classification of types; or
to determine how many were primitive, or which one of them has
arisen from intermixture of types. This difficulty holds not alone
with regard to mankind, hut also with respect to dogs, horses, cattle,
sheep, and other domestic animals, as we shall take occasion to show.
All that ethnography can now hope to accomplish is, to select some
of the more prominent types, or rather groups of proximate types,
compare them with each other, and demonstrate that they are, and
have always been, distinct. ■
A vulgar error has been sedulously impressed upon the public mind,
of which it is very hard to divest it, viz., that all the races of the globe
set out originally from a single point in Asia. Science now knows that
no foundation in fact exists for such a conclusion. The embarrassment
in treating of types or races is constantly increased by false classifications
imposed upon us by prejudiced, naturalists, i I t is argued,
for example, that all the Mongols, all the African Negroes, all the
American Indians, have been derived from one common Asiatic pair
or unique source; whereas, on the other hand, there is no evidence
that human beings were not sown broadcast over the whole face of
the earth, like animals and plants: and we incline to the opinion of
M. A gass iz, that men were created in nations, and not in a single pair.
Since the time of Linnaeus, who first placed man at the head of the
Animal kingdom and in the same series with monkeys, numerous
classifications of human races have been proposed; and it mayihe
well to give a rapid sketch of a few of them, in order to show the
difficulties which encompass the subject, and how hopelessly vague
every definitive attempt of this kind must be, in the present state of
our knowledge.
B u e fo n divides the human race into six varieties viz., Bolar,
Tartar, Austral-Asiatic, European, Negro, and American.
K a n t divides man into four varieties—White, Black, Copper, and
Olive.
H u n t e r , into seven varieties; M etza n , into two—White and Black;
V ir e y , into three; B l um e n b ach , into five — viz., Caucasian,; Mongol,
Malay, Negro* and American; D e sm o u l in s , into sixteen species; B ory
d e S t. Y ino en t makes fifteen species, subdivided into races.
M orton classifies man into twenty-two families; P ic k e r in g , into
eleven races ; L u k e B u r k e , into sixty-three, whereof twenty-eight are
distinct varieties of the intellectual, and thirty-five of the physical races;
J acquinot 26 divides mankind into three species of a, genus homo —
viz., Caucasian, Mongol, and Negro.
The Caucasian, says Jacquinot, is the only species in which white
races with rosy cheeks are found; hut it embraces besides sundry
brunette, brown, and black races — not regarding color as a satisfactory
test of race. The principal races which he includes under the
Caucasian head are, the Germanic, Celtic, Semitic, and Hindoo. The
latter differ much in color, some being black, and others fair, comprising
all intermediate shades, and are probably a mixture of different
primitive stocks.
The Mongol species embraces the Mongol, Sinic, Malay, Polynesian,
and American.
The Negro species comprehends the Ethiopian, Hottentot, Oceanic-
Negro, and Australian. The Ethiopian race comprises those Negroes
inhabiting the greater part of Africa, having black skins, woolly
heads, &c.; Hottentots and Bushmen exhibiting light-brown complexions.
This classification of M. Jacquinot is supported by much ingenuity.
In many respects; it is superior to others; and inasmuch as some
classification, however defective, seems to be indispensable, his may
be received, as simple and the least objectionable. Like all his predecessors,
however, who have written on anthropology, he seems not
to be versed in the monumental literature of Egypt; and, therefore,
he classes together races which (although somewhat similar in type),
having presented distinct physical characteristics for several thousand
years, cannot be regarded as of one and the same species, any more
than his .Caucasians and Negroes.
Though many other classifications might be added, the above
suffice to testify how arbitrary all classifications inevitably must b e ;
because no reason has yet been assigned why, if two original pairs
of human beings be admitted, we should not accept an indefinite
aumber; and, if we are to view mankind as governed by the same
laws that regulate the rest of the animal kingdom, this conclusion
is the most natural, no less than apparently most in accordance with
the general plan of the Creator. We have shown that sundry groups
of human beings, presenting general resemblances in physical char