Nothing is more common than to find men of great intelligence on almost every subject except this, the most vital, indeed the foundation and starting-point of all real knowledge. Especially are clergymen ignorant, and those who assume to be the interpreters of the laws of God are not unfrequently the most ignorant of the most palpable and fundamental of these laws. This should not be so, and in all reasonable probability would not be so had it not been for the untruthful and unfortunate classification of Linnæus. Instead of meeting the Materialists on their own ground, and showing them that however approximating to certain forms of animal life, the human creation was yet separated by an absolutely boundless as well as impassable interval—for the distinctions between them are utterly unlike those separating mere animal beings—they tacitly admitted the truth of their assumptions, and met it by a blind and foolish refusal to investigate the matter, indeed have generally cast their influence on the side of ignorance, and advised against the study of nature and the noblest works of God.
But there can be no contradiction; God cannot lie; and whatever seeming conflict there may be at times between His word and His works, a further search is alone needed to show their perfect uniformity. It is true that the physical resemblances between men and beings of the class mammalia seem closer than those of the latter and some other forms of life, but while there is also an eternal correspondence between structure and functions, it is rational and philosophical to suppose that the difference in the qualities or external manifestations is the safest standard of comparison. Or in other words, whatever may be the seeming physical resemblances, the differences in the faculties show that the former are not reliable. For example: in contemplating the intelligence of certain quadrupeds and birds, can any one suppose or believe for a moment that the difference between them in this respect equals or even approaches to that separating both from human beings? And in the present state of our knowledge, our ignorance of the elementary arrangement of organic life, it is surely safer and more philosophical to be governed by our reason rather than our senses—to accept the differences which separate human intelligence from the animal world as boundless and immeasurable when compared with the apparent physical approximations which seem to unite us with a class of the latter.
In conclusion, it is scarcely necessary to repeat that there is a fixed, uniform, and universal correspondence between structure and function, or between organism and the purpose it is designed to fulfil. We do not know nor need to know the cause of this or the nature of this unity. We only know, and are only permitted to know, that it exists, and are not bound to accept the dogma of the Materialists, that function is the result of organism; nor that of their opponents, who still more falsely imagine results without causes, or that there can be functions without, organism. Truth, in this instance, lies between extremes:—functions or faculties cannot exist without a given structure or organism, but they are not a result of that organism. They exist together inseparably, universally, eternally dependent on each other, but not a result of either. To see there must be eyes; to hear, ears; to walk, the organism of locomotion; to manifest a certain extent of intelligence there must be a corresponding mental organism, but there is no such thing proper as cause and effect, nothing but fact—the fact of mutual existence.
CHAPTER III.
THE HUMAN CREATION.
The human creation, like all other families or forms of being, is composed of a genus, which includes some half dozen or more species. It has been the fashion to call these permanent varieties, and almost every writer on ethnology has made his own classification, or rather has created what number he pleased of these “imaginary varieties.” Agassiz, unquestionably the greatest of American naturalists, but unfortunately not much of a physiologist, and therefore unprepared to deal with the higher truths of ethnology, supposes several species of white men, and, in regard to the subordinate races, would doubtless multiply them ad infinitum. But at this time, or in the existing state of our knowledge, the number actually known to exist cannot be assumed beyond that already named. They are thus:—1st. The Caucasian. 2d. The Mongolian. 3d. The Malay or Oceanic. 4th. The Aboriginal American. 5th. The Esquimaux; and 6th. The Negro or typical African.
The Caucasian can be confounded with no other, for though in some localities, climate and perhaps other causes darken the skin, sometimes with a deep olive tint, and extending, as with the Bedouins and the Jews of the Malabar coast, to almost black, the flowing beard (more constant than color), projecting forehead, oval features, erect posture and lordly presence, stamp him the master man wherever found.
The Mongolian, though less distinctive, is, however, sufficiently so, for his yellow skin, squat figure, beardless face, pyramidal head, and almond eyes, can scarcely be confounded with any other form of man. The Malay is less known, and therefore more difficult to describe. They are darker than the Mongol, though in some islands of a bright copper color, and indeed, vary from light olive to dark brown, and as in the case of the Australians, to deep black, but with no other approximation to the Negro.
The vast populations known under the term Papuan, and mainly Malay, are doubtless extensively mixed with the Negro, for however remote the time, or whatever the form or mode, real negro populations have resided in tropical Asia, and left behind them these remains of their former existence. In some islands, like New Zealand, etc., the ruling dynasties or principal families have a considerable infusion of Caucasian blood, which is shown in their tall, erect form, more or less beard, fair complexion, and manly presence, and intellectually in their prompt and often intelligent acceptance of Christianity.
The Indian, American, or Aboriginal, needs no description; suffice it to say that, from the mouth of the Columbia River to Cape Horn, they are the same species. It is quite possible, indeed probable, that some species, formerly existing on this continent, have disappeared—utterly perished. The investigations of Dr. Tschudi warrant this belief, though his nice discriminations in regard to some of the bones of the head are of little or no importance, as all this might be, and doubtless was, the result of artificial causes. But crania discovered in Southern Mexico and Yucatan, as well as in Peru and Brazil, are sufficient evidence to warrant the belief that a still inferior race did once really inhabit this continent, but whether aboriginal or brought here by some superior race, may never be known. The remains of ancient structures in Yucatan, in Peru, in Mexico, in Brazil, all over the southern portion of the continent, show simply the traces of Caucasian intrusion. It has been generally supposed that Columbus and his companions were the first white men that ever visited this continent, but it may have been discovered, and to a certain extent, occupied, at least certain localities occupied, before even Europe itself, or before the period of authentic history. Any one visiting Mexico, Puebla, or other cities of Spanish America, is amazed and bewildered with the contrast between the vast and magnificent structures that meet his eye, and the existing population. He involuntarily asks himself, “Can these people be the authors of all this art, this beauty, strength and magnificence? Can these miserable, barefooted, blanketed, idle and stolid-looking creatures have built these palaces, these churches, these bridges, these mighty structures, which seem to have been built for eternity itself, so strong and secure are their foundations?” Some years hence this contrast would be still more palpable, and left to themselves, a time would come when it would be obvious that the existing population had nothing to do with these structures, for the mixed blood would have disappeared, and there would be only the simple, unadulterated “native American,” as discovered by the Spaniards three centuries ago. And we have only to apply this to the antiquities of America to understand its history, at all events, to understand the meaning of those half-buried monuments so frequently found on its surface. Adventurers, often, doubtless, shipwrecked mariners, were cast upon the coasts of America. Possibly in some cases before Rome was founded, or Babylon itself was the mighty capital of a still more mighty empire, these enterprising or unfortunate men found themselves undisputed sovereigns of the New World. We know that Northmen found their way here in the eighth century, and doubtless they were preceded at intervals by numerous other Caucasians. Settling in some localities they reigned undisputed masters, built cities, organized governments, framed laws, and laid the foundations of a civilized society. But intermarrying with the natives, they were swallowed up by mongrelism, and, in obedience to an immutable law of physical life, doomed to perish, and at a given period, the white blood extinct, there remained nothing to denote its former existence, except the half-buried palaces and ruined monuments yet to be traced over large portions of the continent. The Toltecs, Aztecs, etc., are simply the remnants of these extinct Caucasians, just as the present population, if left alone in Mexico, the latest portion of it, with Caucasian blood, would be the ruling force, and perhaps retain somewhat or some portion of the Spanish habitudes.
The pure native mind is capable of a certain development, but that is fixed and determinate, and beyond which it can no more progress than it can alter the color of its skin or the form of its brain. Powhatan’s empire in Virginia was undoubtedly aboriginal and probably called out the utmost resources and reached the utmost limit of the Indian mind. The Indian has, and does manifest to a certain extent, a capacity of mental action, but this is too feeble and limited to make a permanent impression on the physical agents that surround him, and therefore he can have no history, for there are no materials—nothing to record. The term, therefore, “Indian antiquities,” is a misnomer and the great congressional enterprise under the editorship of Mr. Schoolcraft an obvious absurdity.