[47] Lectures on Physical Geography, p. 273. (London, 1880.)
[48] See A. Bastian, Zur Lehre von den Geographischen Provinzen (Berlin, 1886); A. De Quatrefages, Histoire Generale des Races Humaines, p. 333, (Paris, 1889); Dr. Thomas Achelis, Die Entwickelung der Modernen Ethnologie, s. 65, (Berlin, 1889). Agassiz was the first to announce (in 1850) that the different races of man are distributed over the world in the same zoölogical provinces as those inhabited by distinct species and genera of mammals. This fact is coming more and more to be the accepted axiom for the study of racial development. (Compare Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 169).
[49] This calculation includes in Asia the Arabian peninsula, Syria, the Iranic regions, most of Asia Minor and the Caucasus; but excludes Hindostan, the occupation of which by the Aryans is within the historic period. In Africa it embraces the tract from the Atlantic to the Red Sea, and from the Mediterranean to the Sudan, nearly all of which was held by the Hamitic peoples when we first learn about it. In Europe it includes the whole continent south of a line drawn from the mouth of the Volga, through St. Petersburg to the Atlantic.
[50] One of the leading European students of anatomical racial type is Dr. J. Kollmann, of Basle. He claims that there are four fundamental skull types in that continent:
1. Narrow faced, brachycephalic.
2. Narrow faced, dolichocephalic.
3. Broad faced, brachycephalic.
4. Broad faced, dolichocephalic.
These forms he believes have been steadily perpetuated and have undergone no change, except by intermarrying; they bear no relation to intellectual ability, and they recur in nations of the same language, customs and history. “Ethnic unity in Europe rests not upon racial identity, but racial (anatomical) diversity.” Verhand. der Berliner Anthrop. Gesell., 1889, s. 332.
[51] A more appropriate view was taken by Canon Isaac Taylor at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1889. He defended the thesis that the human race originated in Europe and bifurcated into the Asian and African branches. (See Nature, 1889, No. 40, p. 632.)
[52] For a recent summary of the evidence on this point consult Isaac Taylor, Origin of the Aryans, p. 129, sq. (London, 1890.)
[53] See Freidrich Müller, Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft, Bd. III., s. 224-5; Sayce, Science of Language, Vol. II., page 178. The latter uses the expression that between the old Egyptian, the Libyan, and the Semitic tongues “the grammatical agreement is most striking.”
[54] On the Guanches, consult the various works of Sabin Berthelot, Dr. Verneau, and later J. Harris Stone in Proceedings of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1888, p. 851. The last-mentioned dwells on the many similarities of their arts to those of the Egyptians.