trate our own views; but nothing adequate' to evince the ability
of the best article we have met with on these Shlaves.
“ Mxloh e lu s io n has heen produced by the constant use in bdoks of words denoting the
supposed state of flux and restlessness in which the early nations of . Europe lived. °The
natural impression, after reading such books, is, that masses of people were continually
coming out of Asia into Europe, and driving others before them But care must be
taken to confine these stories of wholesale colonization to their proper place in the ante-
historic age. For all intents and purposes, it is best to .conceive that at the dawn of the
historic period the leading European races were arranged'on the map pretty much as they
are now. Regarding the Slavonians, at least, this has been established; they are not, as
has generally been supposed, a recent accession out of the depths of Asia, but are as much
an aboriginal race of Eastern, as the Germans are of Central Europe. In short, had a
Roman geographer of the days of the Empire advanced in a straight line from the Atlantic
to the Pacific, he would have traversed the exact succession of races that is to be met in
the same route now. First, he would .have found the Celts occupying as far as the Rhine;
thence, eastward to the Vistula and the Carpathians, he would have found Germans;
beyond them, and stretching away into Central Asia, he would have found the so-called
Scythians a race which, if he had possessed our information, he would have divided into
the two^ great branches of the Slavonians or European Scythians, and the Tatars, Turks,
or Asiatic Scythians; and, finally, beyond these, he would have found Mongolian hordes
overspreading Eastern Asia to the Pacific. These successive races or populations he would
have found shading off into each other at their points of junction; he would hav<?remarked
also a general westward pressure of the whole nffss, tending toward mutual rupture and
invasion, the Mongolian pressing against the Tatars, the Tatars against the Sclavonians,
the Slavonians against the Germans, and the Germans against the Celts. If
“ The Slavonians, we have said, are an aboriginal European" branch of the great
Scythian race.” 46
One of the most striking examples in history of preservation of
type, after the Jews, is that of the Magyar race in Hungary; Completely
encircled by Sclavonians, they have been living there for 1000
years, speaking a distinct language, and still presenting physical
characters so peculiar as to leave no douht of their foreign origin.
“ Head nearly round, forehead little developed, low, and bending; the eyes ¿laced
obliquely, so that the external angle is elevated; the nose short and flat; mouth nrominent,
and lips thick; neck very strong, so that the back of the head appears flat, forming almost
a straight line with the nape; beard weak and scattering; stature small.” «
This picture, which is a faithful description of a modern Hungarian
of the Magyar race, corresponds with the atcounts given of this people
hy older writers, and of the ancient Huns.
History teaches that the Huns settled in Hungary in the fifth cen-
tury after Christ, and to these succeeded a hody of the Magyars, under
A rpad, in the ninth. The type of the two races was identical. This
80 peculiarly exotic, is totally unlike any other in Europe. It
belongs to the great Hralian-Tatar stem of Asia. The derivation is
conceded by eveiy naturalist, from Habeas to the present day: but it is
a curious fact that, although differing in type, the Magyars speak a
dialect of the language of the Fins; and the two races must have been
associated in some way at a remote 'epoclif previously to the settlement
of the Magyars in Hungaiy. De G u ig n e s had traced other
connections, making also the grand error of confounding the Huns
with the Chinese Houng-nou: but that identity of language is no
irrefragable argument in favor of identity of race, will be a positive
result of the researches in this volume. |
Grecian annals afford an instructive lesson in the history of types
of mankind. We trace her circumstantial history, with sufficient
truthfulness, some centunes beyond the foundation of Home, and her
traditions back to about the epoch of Moses. This we can do with
enough certainty to know, that Hellenic Europe was then populated, and
marking toward that mighty destiny which has been the wonder and
object of imitation of all subsequent ages. Who were the people that
achieved so much more than all others of antiquity? And what was
there in climate and other local circumstances that could produce^
such intelligence, coupled with the noblest physical type ? ^ Or, we
may ask, did Greece owe her marvellous superiority to an indigenous |
race ?* The Hellenes and Pelasgi are the two races identified'with her
.earliest traditions ; but when we appeal to history for their,origin, or
seek for the part that each has played in the majestic drama of antiquity,
there ,is little more than conjecture to guide us. Greece did
not come fairly within the scope of M. Edwards’s researches, yet he
has ventured a few note-worthy observations, in connection with the
point before us. He thinks the same principles that governed his examination
of Gaul may be applied to G re e c e an d that the Hellenes and
Pelasgi might be followed, ethnologically, like the Celts and Cymbri.
Everybody speaks of |flP Greek type, regarded as the special characteristic
of that country, referring it to a beau-ideal conformation,
nevertheless, all ancient monuments of art in Greece exhibit a wide
diversity of types, and this at every period of their sculpture. M. Edwards
draws a happy distinction between the Tieroie and the historic
age of Greece : the first, if chiefly fabulous, has doubtless a semi-
historical foundation; the latter is the true historic age —although
no people of antiquity appears to have conceived the “ historical idea
correctly; nor is it popularly understood, even at the present day,
among ourselves.
“ Most of the divinities and personages of the Tieroie times,” says M. Edwards, “ are
formed on the same model that constitutes what we term the beau-ideal. The forms and
proportions of the head and features are so regular that we may describe them with mathematical
precision. A perfectly oval -contour, forehead and nose straight, without depression
between them, would suffice to distinguish this type. The harmony is such that the
presence of these traits implies the others. But such is not the character of the personages
of truly historic times. The philosophers, orators, warriors, and poets, almost all differ
from it, and form a group apart. It cannot be confounded with the first— I will not
attempt to describe it here. It is sufficient to point it out, for one to recognize at once
j., how far it is separated. It greatly resembles, on the contrary, the type which is seen in
other countries of Europe, while the former is scarcely met with there.”