Now when we consider the wide differences between naturalists, not only as to what constitutes race and species—if there be variety of species in the human family—but also in the assignment of peoples and individuals to their respective categories under the direction of the given tests; when we see the human race classified under from one to sixty-three distinct species, according to individual opinions; and when we see that the several tests which govern classification are by no means satisfactory, and that those who have made this subject the study of their lives, cannot agree as touching the fundamental characteristics of such classification—we cannot but conclude, either that there are no absolute lines of separation between the various members of the human family, or that thus far the touchstone by which such separation is to be made remains undiscovered.
ALL TESTS FALLACIOUS.
The color of the human skin, for example, is no certain guide in classification. Microscopists have ascertained that the normal colorations of the skin are not the results of organic differences in race; that complexions are not permanent physical characters, but are subject to change. Climate is a cause of physical differences, and frequently in a single tribe may be found shades of color extending through all the various transitions from black to white. In one people, part occupying a cold mountainous region, and part a heated lowland, a marked difference in color is always perceptible. Peculiarities in the texture of the hair are likewise no proof of race. The hair is more sensibly affected by the action of the climate than the skin. Every degree of color and crispation may be found in the European family alone; and even among the frizzled locks of negroes every gradation appears, from crisped to flowing hair. The growth of the beard may be cultivated or retarded according to the caprice of the individual; and in those tribes which are characterized by an absence or thinness of beard, may be found the practice, continued for ages, of carefully plucking out all traces of beard at the age of puberty. No physiological deformities have been discovered which prevent any people from cultivating a beard if such be their pleasure. The conformation of the cranium is often peculiar to habits of rearing the young, and may be modified by accidental or artificial causes. The most eminent scholars now hold the opinion that the size and shape of the skull has far less influence upon the intelligence of the individual than the quality and convolutions of the brain. The structure of language, especially when offered in evidence supplementary to that of physical science, is most important in establishing a relationship between races. But it should be borne in mind that languages are acquired, not inherited; that they are less permanent than living organisms; that they are constantly changing, merging into each other, one dialect dying out and another springing into existence; that in the migrations of nomadic tribes, or in the arrival of new nations, although languages may for a time preserve their severalty, they are at last obliged, from necessity, to yield to the assimilating influences which constantly surround them, and become merged into the dialects of neighboring clans. And on the other hand, a counter influence is exercised upon the absorbing dialect. The dialectic fusion of two communities results in the partial disappearance of both languages, so that a constant assimilation and dissimilation is going on. "The value of language," says Latham, "has been overrated;" and Whitney affirms that "language is no infallible sign of race;" although both of these authors give to language the first place as a test of national affinities. Language is not a physiological characteristic, but an acquisition; and as such should be used with care in the classification of species.
Science, during the last half century, has unfolded many important secrets; has tamed impetuous elements, called forth power and life from the hidden recesses of the earth; has aroused the slumbering energies of both mental and material force, changed the currents of thought, emancipated the intellect from religious transcendentalism, and spread out to the broad light of open day a vast sea of truth. Old-time beliefs have had to give place. The débris of one exploded dogma is scarcely cleared away before we are startled with a request for the yielding up of another long and dearly cherished opinion. And in the attempt to read the book of humanity as it comes fresh from the impress of nature, to trace the history of the human race, by means of moral and physical characteristics, backward through all its intricate windings to its source, science has accomplished much; but the attempt to solve the great problem of human existence, by analogous comparisons of man with man, and man with animals, has so far been vain and futile in the extreme.
I would not be understood as attempting captiously to decry the noble efforts of learned men to solve the problems of nature. For who can tell what may or may not be found out by inquiry? Any classification, moreover, and any attempt at classification, is better than none; and in drawing attention to the uncertainty of the conclusions arrived at by science, I but reiterate the opinions of the most profound thinkers of the day. It is only shallow and flippant scientists, so called, who arbitrarily force deductions from mere postulates, and with one sweeping assertion strive to annihilate all history and tradition. They attempt dogmatically to set up a reign of intellect in opposition to that of the Author of intellect. Terms of vituperation and contempt with which a certain class of writers interlard their sophisms, as applied to those holding different opinions, are alike an offense against good taste and sound reasoning.
Notwithstanding all these failures to establish rules by which mankind may be divided into classes, there yet remains the stubborn fact that differences do exist, as palpable as the difference between daylight and darkness. These differences, however, are so played upon by change, that hitherto the scholar has been unable to transfix those elements which appear to him permanent and characteristic. For, as Draper remarks, "the permanence of organic forms is altogether dependent on the invariability of the material conditions under which they live. Any variation therein, no matter how insignificant it might be, would be forthwith followed by a corresponding variation in form. The present invariability of the world of organization is the direct consequence of the physical equilibrium, and so it will continue as long as the mean temperature, the annual supply of light, the composition of the air, the distribution of water, oceanic and atmospheric currents, and other such agencies, remain unaltered; but if any one of these, or of a hundred other incidents that might be mentioned, should suffer modification, in an instant the fanciful doctrine of the immutability of species would be brought to its true value."
ORIGIN OF THE INDIANS.
The American Indians, their origin and consanguinity, have, from the days of Columbus to the present time proved no less a knotty question. Schoolmen and scientists count their theories by hundreds, each sustaining some pet conjecture, with a logical clearness equaled only by the facility with which he demolishes all the rest. One proves their origin by holy writ; another by the writings of ancient philosophers; another by the sage sayings of the Fathers. One discovers in them Phœnician merchants; another, the ten lost tribes of Israel. They are tracked with equal certainty from Scandinavia, from Ireland, from Iceland, from Greenland, across Bering Strait, across the northern Pacific, the southern Pacific, from the Polynesian Islands, from Australia, from Africa. Venturesome Carthaginians were thrown upon the eastern shore; Japanese junks on the western. The breezes that wafted hither America's primogenitors are still blowing, and the ocean currents by which they came cease not yet to flow. The finely spun webs of logic by which these fancies are maintained would prove amusing, did not the profound earnestness of their respective advocates render them ridiculous. Acosta, who studied the subject for nine years in Peru, concludes that America was the Ophir of Solomon. Aristotle relates that the Carthaginians in a voyage were carried to an unknown island; whereupon Florian, Gomara, Oviedo, and others, are satisfied that the island was Española. "Who are these that fly as a cloud," exclaims Esaias, "or as the doves to their windows?" Scholastic sages answer, Columbus is the columba or dove here prophesied. Alexo Vanegas shows that America was peopled by Carthaginians; Anahuac being but another name for Anak. Besides, both nations practiced picture-writing; both venerated fire and water, wore skins of animals, pierced the ears, ate dogs, drank to excess, telegraphed by means of fires on hills, wore all their finery on going to war, poisoned their arrows, beat drums and shouted in battle.