Now, whilst these lowest tribes of negro man-eaters dwell in the
same zoological province as the black Gorillas and Chimpanzees; is' it,
[ would ask, through fortuitous accident that, where the red orangs
of the East Indian Archipelago roam the jungle, there should exist
a cannibalism almost parallel, although not mercantile,-—as shown
in the reddish B ’hattas, &c., who, some years ago, devoured two
English missionaries, amongst other instances ?
It is to he remarked, however, that, as voyagers observe, cannibalism
in Polynesia, and also in New Zealand,424 does not seem so
much to have been an instinctive craving among Maori nations, as
to have gradually grown into a habit of luxurious feeding among
nautical wanderers who, in their vicissitudes of navigation, froni
island to island, were often compelled to eat each other.425
It is time to arrest the course of these remarks; the object of
which chiefly is, to eliminate from further discussion some objections
that the unavoidable brevity of the ensuing sections will compel me
to pass by unnoticed. Confined within some 200 pages, my contribution
to the present volume must fall very far short of the materials
collected for its elaboration. I apprehend, nevertheless, that reader's
of the prebeding commentary are now prepared for thé assertion
that a current phrase, “the unity of the human species,” if it possess
any real meaning, leaves us in utter darkness as to the scientific
question of mankind’s lineal derivation from a single pair ; or as to
its counter theory, the plurality of origin from many pairs, situatè
in different geographical centres, and possibly formed at different
epoehas of creation or of evolution. Chronology we have found to
he a “ broken reed” for any event anterior, say, to the 15th century
b . c. : so that there exists no positive limit, determinable by ciphers,
to human antiquity upon earth, save such as palæontology—a sciencè
commenced by Lister in England, Blumenbach in Germany” and
founded on true principles by Cuvier in France—may in the future
discover. To talk of years, or hundreds of them, in the actual state
“ “ Ces abominable coquins!’’-—as the gallant Ca p ita in e Laplace ( Voyage autour du
Monde, &c., mr la corvette la “Favorite,” 1830-2, Paris, 8vo, text, 1835, IV, pp. 8-61)
indignantly exclaims, after witnessing the morality of their women and the human repasts
of the men. The same pages give an excellent idea, too, of the missionaries in that remote
island.
125 “ It will probably be found, on further examination, however, that, with the exception
of the disgusting practice of cannibalism, the black oolor, with crisped hair, common to all,
there are as many points of difference between the [Negrillos] different islanders of the
group, as between any two races in the Pacific,” says E e sk in e ( Journal of a Cruise, &c., tn
H. M. S. “ Havannah,” London, 8vo, 1853, p. 16). He confirms also.L aplace on missionaries;
as does Du P e t it T huaks ( Toy. autour du Monde, &c., frigate la "Venus,” 1836-9,
Paris, 8vo, text, 1843; I, pp 317-36; II, p. 373; IV, pp. 70-88); not to mention Moeren-
hovt (Isles du Grand Océan, Paris, 8vo, 1837 ; I, pp. 216-357 ; II, pp. 283-322, 515).
of this science, is simply absurd,—a mere illustration of what Greg426
properly stigmatizes as “the humiliating subterfuges resorted to,
by men of science, to show that their discoveries are not at variance
with any text .of Scripture.” Other conclusions the reader will draw
for himself.
On the majority of these problems my own opinions assumed
definite shape between 1845 and 1850; but, inasmuch as it is customary
for authors to utter, at some time or other, their individual
“profession of faith,” I may here be permitted to recall, as mine,
some passages of the third lecture on “Egyptian Archaeology,” delivered427
in my last course at this city, more than six years ago.
They hâve since remained inedited; and the only value I attach to
them accrues from the circumstance that, written at the suggestion
of my honored friend the late Samuel George Morton, they have
becomé to me a memento of past interchanges of thought with one
of the noblest of men.
“ Creative Power has veiled, equally, from human ken the origin
“ of man and his end. If any argument were required to impress
“ upon my mind thebenefiaenoe of the Creator towards his crea-
“ tures428—any fact, that in the brain of a human being of cultivated
I intelligence, and which, whispered to each of us in the | still, small
“ voice’ of conscience, proves .the goodness of Deity, not merely to
“ mankind, but to all animate substanpes created by his will, — it is,
“ that, like; every other animal, Man knows not the hour of his birth
“ or of his death; can discover, by no process of retrospective ratio-
“ cination, the moment when he entered this life; nor ascertain, by
“ anticipation, the precise instant when he is to depart from it.
“ An example will illustrate my meaning :
“Leaving aside, in this question, those traditionary legends of our
“ respective infancies, which, in themselves, may be true—although
“ received, as inevitably they must be, o*i the “ ipse dixit” of others,
“ to us these accounts of the cradle and nursery are not certain;429 —
“ each individual’s memory can carry his personal history back to the
126 Creed of Christendom, pp. 2, 45-51.
422 Philadelphia, Chinese Museum, 6th January, 1851 :—“ North American and Gazette ”
Jan. 7.
428 Beyond all works, that of my venerable friend, M. Hercule Stratjs-Dürokheim
(Théologie de la Nature, Paris, 3 vols. 8vo, 1852) contains the ablest demonstration of Creative
wisdom and benevolence through the science of comparative physiology, in which the
author of “ Anatomie descriptive and comparative du Chat,” is known by naturalists to be
an unsurpassed adept.
429 Vico, Scienza Nuova (translated by “ l’Auteur de l’Essai sur la formation du Dogme
Catholique,” Paris, 12mo, 1844; pp. 41-4) — Axioms IX-XVI; on the distinction between
the “ true,” and the “ certain.”