Progress of Human Population.—"The hunter state," it has been argued, "which Montesquieu placed the first, was probably only the second stage to which mankind arrived; since so many arts must have been invented to catch a salmon, or a deer, that society could no longer have been in its infancy when they came into use."[935] When regions where the spontaneous fruits of the earth abound became overpeopled, men would naturally diffuse themselves over the neighboring parts of the temperate zone; but a considerable time would probably elapse before this event took place; and it is possible, as a writer before cited observes, that in the interval before the multiplication of their numbers and their increasing wants had compelled them to emigrate, some arts to take animals were invented, but far inferior to what we see practised at this day among savages. As their habitations gradually advanced into the temperate zone, the new difficulties they had to encounter would call forth by degrees the spirit of invention, and the probability of such inventions always rises with the number of people involved in the same necessity.[936]
A distinguished modern writer, who coincides for the most part in the views above mentioned, has introduced one of the persons in his second dialogue, as objecting to the theory of the human race having gradually advanced from a savage to a civilized state, on the ground that "the first man must have inevitably been destroyed by the elements or devoured by savage beasts, so infinitely his superiors in physical force."[937] He then contends against the difficulty here started by various arguments, all of which were, perhaps, superfluous; for if a philosopher is pleased to indulge in conjectures on this subject, why should he not assign, as the original seat of man, some one of those large islands within the tropics, which are as free from large beasts of prey as Van Diemen's Land or Australia? Here man may have remained for a period, peculiar to a single island, just as some of the large anthropomorphous species are now limited to one island within the tropics. In such a situation, the new-born race might have lived in security, though far more helpless than the New Holland savages, and might have found abundance of vegetable food. Colonies may afterwards have been sent forth from this mother country, and then the peopling of the earth may have proceeded according to the hypothesis before alluded to.
To form a probable conjecture respecting the country from whence the early civilization of India was derived, has been found almost as difficult as to determine the original birth-place of the human race. That the dawn of oriental civilization did not arise within the limits of the tropics, is the conclusion to which Baron William von Humboldt has come after much patient research into "the diversities of the structure of language and their influence on the mental development of the human race." According to him the ancient Zend country from whence the spread of knowledge and the arts has been traced in a south-easterly direction, lay to the north-west of the upper Indus.[938]
As to the time of the first appearance of man upon the earth, if we are to judge from the discordance of opinion amongst celebrated chronologers, not even a rude approximation has yet been made towards determining a point of so much interest. The problem seems hitherto to have baffled the curiosity of the antiquary, if possible, more completely than the fixing on a geographical site for the original habitation of the ancestors of the human race. The Chevalier Bunsen, in his elaborate and philosophical work on Ancient Egypt,[939] has satisfied not a few of the learned, by an appeal to monumental inscriptions still extant, that the successive dynasties of kings may be traced back without a break, to Menes, and that the date of his reign would correspond with the year 3640 B. C. He supposes at the same time, what is most reasonable, that the Egyptian people must have existed for a long period (probably at least for five centuries), in their earlier and less settled state, before they reached the point of civilization at which Menes consolidated them into a great and united empire. This would carry us back to upwards of 4000 years B. C., or to an epoch coincident with that commonly set down for the creation of the world in accordance with computations founded on the combined ages of the successive antediluvian patriarchs. It follows that the same epoch of Menes is anterior by a great many centuries to the most ancient of the dates usually fixed upon for the Mosaic deluge. The fact that no record or tradition of any great and overwhelming flood has been detected in the mythology, or monumental annals of the Egyptians, will suggest many reflections to a geologist who has weighed well the evidence we possess of a variety of partial deluges which have happened in districts not free like Egypt, for the last 3000 years, from earthquakes and other causes of great aqueous catastrophes. The tales and legends of calamitous floods preserved in Greece, Asia Minor, the southern shores of the Baltic, China, Peru, and Chili, have, as we have seen, been all of them handed down to us by the inhabitants of regions in which the operation of natural causes in modern times, and the recurrence of a succession of disastrous floods, afford us data for interpreting the meaning of the obscure traditions of an illiterate age.[940]
In his learned treatise on ancient chronology, Dr. Hales has selected, from a much greater number, a list of no less than 120 authors, all of whom give a different period for the epoch of the creation of the world, the extreme range of difference between them amounting to no less than 3268 years. It appears that even amongst authorities, who in England are generally regarded, as orthodox, there is a variance, not of years or of one or two centuries, but of upwards of a millennium, according as they have preferred to follow the Hebrew, or the Samaritan, or the Greek versions of the Mosaic writings. Can we then wonder that they who decipher the monuments of Egypt, or the geologist who interprets the earth's autobiography, should arrive at views respecting the date of an ancient empire, or the age of our planet, irreconcilable with every one of these numerous and conflicting chronologies? The want of agreement amongst the learned in regard to the probable date of the deluge of Noah is a source of far greater perplexity and confusion than our extreme uncertainty as to the epoch of the creation,—the deluge being a comparatively modern event, from which the repeopling of the earth and the history of the present races of mankind is made to begin.
Naturalists have long felt that to render probable the received opinion that all the leading varieties of the human family have originally sprung from a single pair, (a doctrine against which there appears to me to be no sound objection,) a much greater lapse of time is required for the slow and gradual formation of races, (such as the Caucasian, Mongolian, and Negro,) than is embraced in any of the popular systems of chronology. The existence of two of those marked varieties above mentioned can be traced back 3000 years before the present time, or to the painting of pictures, preserved in the tombs or on the walls of buried temples in Egypt. In these we behold the Negro and Caucasian physiognomies portrayed as faithfully and in as strong contrast as if the likenesses of those races had been taken yesterday. When we consider therefore the extreme slowness of the changes, which climate and other modifying causes have produced in modern times, we must allow for a vast series of antecedent ages, in the course of which the long-continued influence of similar external circumstances gave rise to peculiarities, probably increased in many successive generations, until they were fixed by hereditary transmission. The characteristic forms and features thus acquired by certain tribes, may have been afterwards diffused by migration from a few centres over wide continental spaces. The theory, therefore, that all the races of man have come from one common stock receives support from every investigation which forces us to expand our ideas of the duration of past time, or which multiplies the number of years that have passed away since the origin of man. Hitherto, geology has neither enlarged nor circumscribed the "human period;" but simply proved that in the history of animated nature it is comparatively modern, or the last of a long series of antecedent epochs, in each of which the earth has been successively peopled by distinct species of animals and plants.
In an early stage of society the necessity of hunting acts as a principle of repulsion, causing men to spread with the greatest rapidity over a country, until the whole is covered with scattered settlements. It has been calculated that eight hundred acres of hunting-ground produce only as much food as half an acre of arable land. When the game has been in a great measure exhausted, and a state of pasturage succeeds, the several hunter tribes, being already scattered, may multiply in a short time into the greatest number which the pastoral state is capable of sustaining. The necessity, says Brand, thus imposed upon the two savage states, of dispersing themselves far and wide over the country, affords a reason why, at a very early period, the worst parts of the earth may have become inhabited.
But this reason, it may be said, is only applicable in as far as regards the peopling of a continuous continent; whereas the smallest islands, however remote from continents, have almost always been found inhabited by man. St. Helena, it is true, afforded an exception; for when that island was discovered in 1501, it was only inhabited by sea-fowl, and occasionally by seals and turtles, and was covered with a forest of trees and shrubs, all of species peculiar to it, with one or two exceptions, and which seem to have been expressly created for this remote and insulated spot.[941]
The islands also of Mauritius, Bourbon, Pitcairns, and Juan Fernandez, and those of the Galapagos archipelago, one of which is seventy miles long, were inhabited when first discovered, and, what is more remarkable than all, the Falkland Islands, which together are 120 miles in length by 60 in breadth, and abounding in food fit for the support of man.
Drifting of canoes to vast distances.—But very few of the numerous coral islets and volcanoes of the vast Pacific, capable of sustaining a few families of men, have been found untenanted; and we have, therefore, to inquire whence and by what means, if all the members of the great human family have had one common source, could those savages have migrated. Cook, Forster, and others, have remarked that parties of savages in their canoes must have often lost their way, and must have been driven on distant shores, where they were forced to remain, deprived both of the means and of the requisite intelligence for returning to their own country. Thus Captain Cook found on the island of Wateoo three inhabitants of Otaheite, who had been drifted thither in a canoe, although the distance between the two isles is 550 miles. In 1696, two canoes, containing thirty persons, who had left Ancorso, were thrown by contrary winds and storms on the island of Samar, one of the Philippines, at a distance of 800 miles. In 1721, two canoes, one of which contained twenty-four, and the other six persons, men, women, and children, were drifted from an island called Farroilep to the island of Guaham, one of the Marians, a distance of 200 miles.[942]