Fig. 1.
INTRODUCTION.
Previous to entering upon the details connected with the varieties, and affinities of the human species, it is advisable to explain the meaning and full import of certain terms that are likely to be of frequent occurrence. It is only, however, so far as an explanation is required, that any remarks will be made. The questions themselves, although necessary and preliminary, are well capable of being isolated from the properly descriptive portions of the subject, and of forming separate sections of ethnological science; a separation which is fully justified by their great range and extent.
A. Terms descriptive of differences in the way of physical conformation.—If we were to take three individual specimens of the human species, which should exhibit three of the most important differences, they would, I think, be—1. A Mongolian, or a Tungús, from Central or Siberian Asia; 2, a Negro from the Delta of the Niger; and 3, a European from France, Germany, or England. At the first view the Negro would seem the most unlike of the three; and, perhaps, he would do so after a minute and careful scrutiny. Still, the characteristic and differential features of the Asiatic would be of a very remarkable kind. In the general profile, in the form of the eye, in the front view of the face, he would differ from both. In the colour of his skin, in the character of his hair, and in the lower part of his profile, he would differ from the Negro. In the upper portion of the profile, and in the outline of the head, he would differ from the European.
The Mongolian's, or Tungusian's, face would be broad and flat, with the cheek-bones prominent. The breadth of the head from side to side would be nearly equal to its length from the forehead to the occiput; the nose would be flat, and, almost certainly, neither arched nor aquiline; the eyes would be drawn upwards at their outer angle, the skin would be of a yellowish-brown, the hair straight, the beard scanty, and the stature undersized.
The Negro, besides his black complexion and crisp hair, would exhibit a greater depth of head measuring from before backwards, and the upper jaw would be much more projecting. Possibly it might be so prominent as to give the head the appearance of being placed behind the face rather than above it.
The European would be characterized by negative rather than positive qualities. His face would be less broad, and his head would have greater depth in proportion to its breadth than would be the case with the Mongol. As compared with the African he would differ most in the parts between the nose and chin. The mouth of the Negro, instead of lying under the nose and forehead, projects forwards, in a slightly elongated shape, so as, in extreme cases, to be a muzzle rather than a mouth; the effect of which, as already stated, is to throw the upper part of the face and head behind the jaw. In the European profile, on the other hand, the general direction is vertical. The upper jaw does not project, and the forehead does not retire; so that the forehead, nose, and mouth are, comparatively speaking, nearly in the same line.
Now these distinctions we find in looking at the face only; those of the Mongolian being best shown in a front view, those of the Negro and European in profile. They are also those that would be drawn by a painter or a sculptor; i.e. such as we can detect by merely examining the outline and surface of the head and face. They are external. Differences in the colour of the eyes and the form of the limbs might also be easily discovered.