INTRODUCTION.

NATURAL HISTORY OF MAN.

Fig. 1.

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 anexplanationis required, thatany 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 thegeneralprofile, 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 thelowerpart of his profile, he would differ from the Negro. In theupperportion of the profile, and in the outline of thehead, 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 placedbehindthe face rather thanaboveit.

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 lyingunderthe nose and forehead, projects forwards, in a slightly elongated shape, so as, in extreme cases, to be amuzzlerather than a mouth; the effect of which, as already stated, is to throw the upper part of the face and headbehindthe jaw. In the European profile, on the other hand, the general direction is vertical. The upper jaw does notproject, and the forehead does notretire; 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 areexternal. Differences in the colour of the eyes and the form of the limbs might also be easily discovered.

Important as these are, they are not the points which the ethnologist most looks to. Although the colour of the skin and eyes and the texture of the hair may be determined by external influences, the real reasons forthe differences ofoutlinelie in the differences of the skull and the bony parts of the face: and as, in addition to this, the skull is the receptacle of the brain, and the brain is the organ wherein the human species most differs from others, anatomists have long been in the habit of determining the different varieties of the human race, by the difference in the conformation of their skulls. With this view, the particular bones of most importance are the following:—

The Frontal bone, forming the forehead.—The more the frontal bone retires, the lower is the forehead, and the more prominent the face. The more it is vertical or arched, the more the brain seems to be in superpositionoverthe face; rather than lyingbehindit. By drawing one line from the opening of the ear to the base of the nose, by drawing a second from the most prominent part of the forehead to the insertion of the teeth, and by measuring the inner angle at which these two lines bisect each other, we have the famous facial angle of Camper; in other words, we have a measure for the extent to which a forehead is retreating or vertical.

The Occipital bone.—This forms the back of the head. The distance between the frontal and occipital bones is the occipito-frontal diameter. It constitutes thelengthordepthof the head, in contradistinction to itsbreadth.

The Parietal bones, forming the sides of the skull.—The distance between the two parietal bones is the parietal diameter. It constitutes thebreadthof the skull, in contradistinction to itslengthordepth. The ratio between these two diameters has been most studied by Professor Retzius, of Stockholm. Nations where the development is in the occipito-frontal diameter are calleddolikhokephalic.[1]Nations where it is in theparietaldiameter are calledbrakhykephalic.[2]

The Zygoma.—Formed by the union of two processes, one from the malar, and one from the temporal bone, and enclosing a space, within which the muscles pass from the temporal bone to the lower jaw. It constitutes the ridge that can be felt through the skin, between the cheek-bone and the ear. When the zygomatic space is large, the arch of the zygoma itself projects laterally outwards.

The Malar bones, i.e. the cheek-bones.—It is unnecessary to say that the prominence of the cheek-bone affects the physiognomy. When, over and above this prominence, the zygoma has a lateral and outward development, the breadth of the face becomes remarkably and characteristically broad and flat. It is upon the effect of a great zygomatic development on the form of the skull that Prichard has founded one of his primary divisions.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Distance between the zygomata gives breadth to theface. Distance between the parietal bones, to thehead.

The Nasal bones.—The flatter the nasal bones the flatter the nose. They are generally flat in tribes of Central Asia and Africa; prominent, or saddle-shaped, in those of Europe.

The Upper Maxillary bone.—In this are inserted the teeth of the upper jaw. In the European it is nearly perpendicular. In the Negro it projects forwards; hence, in the European, the insertion of the teeth isperpendicular, in the Africanoblique. The effect of a projecting maxilla is a character upon which Prichard has founded one of his primary divisions. When the insertion of the teeth is perpendicular, or nearly perpendicular to the base of the nose, the skull isorthognathic;[3]when projecting forwards,prognathic.[4]

Fig. 4.

Upon these distinctions are founded the following forthcoming terms: occipito-frontal diameter, parietal diameter,occipito-frontal[5]profile, frontal profile, nasal profile, maxillary profile, zygomatic development.

Next to the head, the bony structure of the pelvis has drawn most attention; the importance thus given being natural and reasonable. The form of the pelvis determines the erect posture of man. These, however, and other numerous minor details will be noticed as occasion requires.

Notwithstanding the anatomical character of the principles upon which the varieties of the Human Species have been arranged, the terms denoting the chief divisions have not been given upon anatomical grounds. Hence we do not talk of thezygomaticor theoccipito-frontaltribes, but of theNegro, or theMongolian, &c. In other words, the term is taken from that particular variety which has the most characteristic conformation.

How many of such terms are necessary is a disputed point; the number of the primary divisions being undetermined. My own opinion is in favour of it being limited tothree,—the Mongolian, the African, and the European. To these, many would add a fourth, and fifth, the Malay and American; whilst others would raise the Australian and Hottentot (and many other) conformations into separate and primary types. As terms, these will be retained. Their value, however, as the names of groups and divisions, will be subordinate to that of the three great types first named; a circumstance which brings us to the terms,typical,sub-typical,transitionalandquasi-transitional.

A Malay and an American, although different, agree between themselves much more than either of them would with a Negro. Furthermore, each of them differs from the Mongolian and Chinese; less, however, than from the African and European.

Now, so far as this difference is concerned, the termstypicalandsub-typical, in their usual sense, are sufficient; the Mongolian being thetypeof the variety which he represents, whilst the Malay and American each illustrate asub-typicalmodification.

But this is not all. In departing from one type, an individual, a tribe, or a nation may approach another. This is the case when the hair of the African becomes straight, his complexion brunette, and his lips thin. It is also the case when a Mongol becomes light-haired or blue-eyed. In each of these changes the effect is the same. The original conformation has become Europeanized. Hence we have—

1st.Simple sub-typical deviation.—This occurs in the Eskimo. His face is broader than that of the Mongolian; but, as this increased breadth merely makes him somewhat unlike the natives of Central Asia, without approximating him to the African or European, the deviation issimple.

2nd.Deviation with Transition.—The Finlander has a Mongoliform skull, but (very often) blue eyes and light hair; so that he agrees with the European where he differs with the Kalmuk. This is deviation and something more. It is deviation accompanied with the phenomenon of a transition in form.

Transitions in form, however, are of two kinds—a.those in which descent plays a part;b.those in which causes other than descent play a part.

a.The light-haired Finlander is probably one of three things—

1. The descendant of Mongolians passing into Europeans.

2. The descendant of Europeans passing into Mongolians.

3. The descendant of the common stock from which the Europeans on one side, and Mongolians on the other, originated. In all these cases his differential characters are accounted for by the doctrine ofdescent.

b.Contrast, however, the case of an Australian Black. He has Mongol characters and he has Negro characters; so that, looking to hisformonly, he presents the phenomenon of transition; yet he is in none of the predicaments of the Finlander, since few ethnologists believe that,in the way of descent, he has any but the most indirect relationship to the African.

Hence,transitional formsare of two kinds, the first indicates descent, affiliation, and historical connexion; the second, the effect of common climatologic, alimentary, or social influences. This last will be calledquasi-transitional.

B.Terms descriptive of differences in the way of language.—At the present moment, there are three methods by which the relation between the different words that constitute sentences is indicated:—1. The method of which the Chinese is a sample; 2. The method of which the Greek and Latin are samples; 3. The method of which the English is a sample.

In the way of illustration, though not in the way of history, it is best to take the second first.

1.The Classical method.—In a word likehomin-em, there are two parts,homin-, radical;-em, inflectional. In the wordte-tig-i, there are the same. The power of these parts is clear. Thetig-andhomin-denote the simpleaction, or the simpleobject. Thete-denotes the time in which it takes place; the-ithe agent. In the propositionte-tig-i homin-em, the-emdenotes therelationbetween the object (the man touched) and the action (of touching).Logically, there are two ideas,e.g., that of theaction or object, and that of the superadded conditions in respect to time, agency, and relation. In Latin and Greek, as in many other languages, these superadded conditions are expressed by altering the form of the original word. Sometimes this is done by the addition of some sound or sounds, sometimes by simple change—(a,)homin-is,homin-em; (b,)speak,spoke. Now this method of expressing the relation between the different words of a proposition by changes in the form of the words themselves is called the method ofinflection, and languages which adopt it are calledinflectional.

2.The English method.—The English language possesses inflections. Words likefather-s,touch-ed,spoke, are instances of it. Nevertheless it has such important non-inflectional methods, that it may fairly be put in contrast with the Latin and Greek. Where a Roman saidte-tig-i, we sayI have touched, orI touched; usingI, a separate word, instead of the incorporated syllable-i. Where a Roman saidpatr-i, we sayto father; where a Roman saidtang-am, we sayI will(orshall)touch. In other words, we make auxiliary verbs and prepositions do the work of inflections, expressive of case and tense.

3.The Chinese method.—The Chinese method agrees with the English in expressing the different conditions and relations of actions and objects by separate words rather than by inflections; and it carries this principle so far as to have even a less amount of inflection; according to some writers, none at all. Wherein, then, does it differ? Even thus. The English is non-inflectional because it has lost inflections which it once possessed. The Chinese is non-inflectional because inflections have never been developed. This involves a great difference between the nature of the words which, in the two languages (English and Chinese)do the work of the Greek and Latin inflections. In English they are, generally speaking, so abstract, as to have a meaning only when in the context with other words. In Chinese they are often the names of objects and actions,i.e.nouns and verbs. If, instead of saying,I gotoLondon,figs comefromTurkey,the sun shinesthroughthe air, we said,I go, endLondon,figs come, originTurkey,the sun shines, passageair, we should discourse after the manner of the Chinese.

But what if the inflectional parts of inflected words (nouns and verbs) were once separate words, which have since been incorporated with the radical term? In such a case, the difference between languages of the Chinese, and languages of the classical type would be a difference of degree only. Nay more, in languages like the Chinese the separate words most in use to express relation may become adjuncts or annexes. In this case, inflection is developed out of mere juxtaposition, and composition. Is this a hypothesis or a real fact? It is thus much of a fact. The numerous inflectional languages fall into two classes. In one the inflections have no appearance of having been separate words. In the other their origin as separate words is demonstrable.

The nomenclature arising from these distinctions, and requiring notice in the present preliminary remarks, is as follows:—

1.Languages of the Chinese type.—Aptotic.[6]

2.Inflection which can generally be shown to have arisen out of the juxtaposition and composition of different words.—Agglutinate.—Here the incorporation has not been sufficiently complete to wholly disguise the originally independent and separate character of the inflectional addition.

3.Inflection, wherein the existence of the inflectional elements as separate and independent words cannot be shown.—Amalgamate.—Here the speculator is at liberty to argue from the analogy of the agglutinate inflections, and to suppose that, owing to a greater amount of euphonic influences, the incorporation is more perfect.

4.Languages of the English type.—Anaptotic.[7]

c.Terms descriptive of differences in social cultivation.

1.The hunter state.—The full import of this term, which always implies a low degree of civilization, is to be inferred from the extent to which it indicates migratory habits, precariousness of subsistence, and imperfect property in the soil. Changing the land for the sea, the fisher state is essentially the same.

2.The pastoral state.—Precariousness of subsistence less than in the hunter state. Migratory habits, in many cases, much the same. Higher in the scale of civilization; since the breeding of animals gives moveable property. Property in the soil improved but still imperfect.

3.The agricultural state.—Migratory habits rare. Precariousness of food but slight. Property in the soil—except in the cases of migratory[8]cultivation—perfect.

4, 5.Material and moral influences in the history of the world.—The first term means changes effected by physical force only; the second, the influences of religion, literature, science, and political and social morality.

FOOTNOTES:[1]Fromdolikhos=long, andkefalæ=head.[2]Frombrakhys=short, andkefalæ=head.[3]Fromorthos=upright, andgnathos=jaw.[4]Frompro=forwards, andgnathos=jaw.[5]The outline of the hairy scalp.[6]Froma=not, andptosis=a case.[7]Fromana=back, andptosis=a case. Falling back from inflection.[8]As that of some of the sub-Himalayan and Indo-Chinese tribes.

[1]Fromdolikhos=long, andkefalæ=head.

[2]Frombrakhys=short, andkefalæ=head.

[3]Fromorthos=upright, andgnathos=jaw.

[4]Frompro=forwards, andgnathos=jaw.

[5]The outline of the hairy scalp.

[6]Froma=not, andptosis=a case.

[7]Fromana=back, andptosis=a case. Falling back from inflection.

[8]As that of some of the sub-Himalayan and Indo-Chinese tribes.

The Primary Varieties of the Human Species.

The questions connected with the Natural History of the Human Species are so thoroughly questions of descent, affiliation, or pedigree, that I have no hesitation in putting the names of the primary divisions in the form of Greek patronymics; the supposed ancestor (oreponymus) being, of course, no real individual, but an ethnological fiction.

To have used, instead, the wordsstock,race,tribe, or even the more scientific terms—order,class,sub-order, preceded by an adjective, and to have spoken of theMongolian stock,race,tribeororder, &c., would, apparently, have been the correcter method. It is not, however, so convenient. Every word of the sort in question is either required for the expression of the minor divisions, or is objectionable on other grounds.

I am also aware that this use of the forms in-idæto express the divisions of aspecies, rather than those of anorder, is at variance with the nomenclature of thezoologists. Still, the terms are less embarrassed with inconveniences than any I have hit upon.

I.Mongolidæ.—Face broad and flat from either the development of the zygomata, or that of the parietal bones; often from the depression of the nasal bones. Frontal profile retiring, or depressed, rarely approaching the perpendicular. Maxillary profile, moderately prognathic or projecting, rarely orthognathic. Eyes often oblique. Skin rarely a true white; rarely a jet black. Irides generally dark. Hair straight, and lank, and black; rarely light-coloured; sometimes curly, rarely woolly.Languages.—Aptotic, and agglutinate; rarely with a truly amalgamate inflection.Distribution.—Asia, Polynesia, America.Influence upon the history of the world.—Material rather than moral.II.Atlantidæ.—Maxillary profile projecting, nasal generally flat, frontal retiring, cranium dolikhokephalic, the parietal diameter being generally narrow. Eyes rarely oblique. Skin often jet-black, very rarely approaching a pure white. Hair crisp, woolly, rarely straight, still more rarely light-coloured.Languages.—With an agglutinate, rarely an amalgamate inflection.Distribution.—Africa.Influence on the history of the world.—Inconsiderable.III.Iapetidæ.—Maxillary profile but little projecting, nasal often prominent, frontal sometimes nearly vertical. Face rarely very flat, moderately broad. Skull generally dolikhokephalic. Eyes rarely oblique. Skin white, or brunette. Hair never woolly, often light-coloured. Irides black, blue, grey.Languages.—With amalgamate inflections, or else anaptotic; rarely agglutinate, never aptotic.Distribution.—Europe.Influence on the history of the world.—Greater than that of either the Mongolidæ or the Atlantidæ. Moral as well as material.

Languages.—Aptotic, and agglutinate; rarely with a truly amalgamate inflection.

Distribution.—Asia, Polynesia, America.

Influence upon the history of the world.—Material rather than moral.

II.Atlantidæ.—Maxillary profile projecting, nasal generally flat, frontal retiring, cranium dolikhokephalic, the parietal diameter being generally narrow. Eyes rarely oblique. Skin often jet-black, very rarely approaching a pure white. Hair crisp, woolly, rarely straight, still more rarely light-coloured.

Languages.—With an agglutinate, rarely an amalgamate inflection.

Distribution.—Africa.

Influence on the history of the world.—Inconsiderable.

III.Iapetidæ.—Maxillary profile but little projecting, nasal often prominent, frontal sometimes nearly vertical. Face rarely very flat, moderately broad. Skull generally dolikhokephalic. Eyes rarely oblique. Skin white, or brunette. Hair never woolly, often light-coloured. Irides black, blue, grey.

Languages.—With amalgamate inflections, or else anaptotic; rarely agglutinate, never aptotic.

Distribution.—Europe.

Influence on the history of the world.—Greater than that of either the Mongolidæ or the Atlantidæ. Moral as well as material.

These characters have been framed to meet the typical, sub-typical, andquasi-transitional, but not the true transitional forms. The reason of this is clear. Where the transition isreal, and where the affiliation in the way of descent coincides with similarity of conformation, the tribe thus situated belong totwodivisions, rather than to any single one.

The term Altaic is taken from the Altai mountains in Central Asia, these being a convenient geographical centre for the different nations and tribes comprised in this division. It contains the following sub-divisions:—

1. The Seriform Stock.

2. The Turanian Stock.

Physical conformation.—Mongol.Languages.—Either wholly aptotic, or with only the rudiments of an inflection.Area.—China, Tibet, and the Indo-Chinese, or Transgangetic, Peninsula, as far as Malaya; the Himalayan, and parts of the sub-Himalayan, range of mountains.Chief Divisions.—1. The Chinese. 2. The Tibetans. 3. The Anamese. 4. The Siamese. 5. The Kambojians. 6. The Burmese. 7. The Môn. 8. Numerous unplaced tribes.

Physical conformation.—Mongol.

Languages.—Either wholly aptotic, or with only the rudiments of an inflection.

Area.—China, Tibet, and the Indo-Chinese, or Transgangetic, Peninsula, as far as Malaya; the Himalayan, and parts of the sub-Himalayan, range of mountains.

Chief Divisions.—1. The Chinese. 2. The Tibetans. 3. The Anamese. 4. The Siamese. 5. The Kambojians. 6. The Burmese. 7. The Môn. 8. Numerous unplaced tribes.

I have begun with the nations and tribes represented by the Chinese, Tibetans, and Indo-Chinese, on the strength of the primitive condition of their languages. This represents the earliest known stage of human speech; bywhich I mean, not that it was spoken earlier than the other tongues of the world, but only that it has changed, or grown, more slowly. I should also add, that over and above the fact of these languages being destitute of true inflection, the separate words generally consist of only a single syllable. Hence the class has been calledmonosyllabic. This latter character, however, has noessentialconnection with the aptotic form. A language of dissyllables or trisyllables may, for any thing known to the contrary, be as destitute of inflections as a monosyllabic one. Still, it must be admitted that no such tongue has yet been discovered.

Locality.—China; bounded by the countries of the Koreans, Mantshu, Mongolians, Tibetans, and the hill tribes of the Transgangetic Peninsula and Assam.Religion.—Modified Buddhism, or the religion of Fo.Mode of Writing.—Rhæmatographic,i.e.the written signs represent wholewords;[9]not merely the parts of words, single articulate sounds or syllables.Physical Conformation.—Mongoliform. According to Prichard the maxillary profile projects. According to Retzius, the maxillary profile projects, and the cranial development is elongated, or occipito-frontal. That the jaw, in some degree, projects, and that the forehead also retires, is shown by a remark of Tradescant Lay's,—e.g.: that the Chinese profile slopes upwards from the chin to the beginning of the hairy scalp.

Locality.—China; bounded by the countries of the Koreans, Mantshu, Mongolians, Tibetans, and the hill tribes of the Transgangetic Peninsula and Assam.

Religion.—Modified Buddhism, or the religion of Fo.

Mode of Writing.—Rhæmatographic,i.e.the written signs represent wholewords;[9]not merely the parts of words, single articulate sounds or syllables.

Physical Conformation.—Mongoliform. According to Prichard the maxillary profile projects. According to Retzius, the maxillary profile projects, and the cranial development is elongated, or occipito-frontal. That the jaw, in some degree, projects, and that the forehead also retires, is shown by a remark of Tradescant Lay's,—e.g.: that the Chinese profile slopes upwards from the chin to the beginning of the hairy scalp.

No country in the world of equal magnitude with China has so homogeneous or so dense a population. From the ocean to Tibet, from Korea to Cochin-China, the language is one, and the physiognomy is one; and it is only when we reach the mountain-ridges of the west and south, that we find, in the ruder and more imperfectly civilized tribes that inhabit them, any material variation from the general uniformity of the most populous empire in the world. This is the case whatever be the test that is applied. The language varies from the refined speech of the Mandarinsto the comparative rudeness of certain provincial dialects; the complexion and contour of the face vary also; and the civilization is less characteristic in some districts than in others; but all these deviations lie within narrow limits.

In China, the steppe-land of High Asia slopes downwards to the North Pacific. Hence we have a sea-board of average proportion as compared with the inland area. It faces, however, one ocean only; and that the Pacific. Of this no island larger than Hainan is inhabited by a Chinese population; Formosanotbeing Chinese. No mountain-ranges are of sufficient magnitude to be compared with the systems of Tibet or those of the Transgangetic Peninsula. Still, there are three well-marked watersheds—that of the Hoang-ho on the north, that of the Canton River on the south, and that of Kiang-Ku between them: and there are the fertile alluvial valleys corresponding.

Upon the whole the physical geography of China is that of an agricultural and industrial population. This the Chinese are to a preeminent degree: and when we come to the Malay Archipelago we shall find that they are also traders. I am much more inclined to measure their civilization by this test, than by their pretensions to an indigenous literature of an almost unfathomable antiquity; a point which will be noticed in the sequel.

In physical conformation the Chinese have a yellow-brown complexion, a broad face, and a scanty beard, lank black hair, dark irides, and a stature below that of the European. This is what we expect, as part and parcel of the common Mongol characteristics. Harshness of feature they have in a less degree than the true Mongolians; a tendency to obesity in a greater. In this respect, they have been calledMongols softened down. This is what they really are. One point of physiognomy, however, ismore peculiarly Chinese than aught else,—viz. the linear character, and oblique direction of the opening of the eyes. This isnarrow, so that little of the eye is seen. It is also drawn upwards at its outer angle, and so becomes oblique in its position. Sometimes in addition to this the upper eyelid hangs heavy and tumid over the eyeball; and sometimes the skin forms a crescentic fold between the inner angle of the eye and the nose; as may be seen in individuals out of China, and which is not uncommon in England.

Now the peculiarity that I have just attempted to describe, is one of the minute points of difference between the Chinese and several other Mongol nations. Theoblique eyewill often be noticed in the following pages; sometimes from the fact of its presence, sometimes from that of its absence. It is not exclusively Chinese: but it is found in its most marked form in China.

Localities.—Tibet, Bután, Ladakh, Bultistan, or Little Tibet.Political relations.—Tibet, subject to China, Ladakh a part of the Sikh empire, Bultistan and Bután, independent.Divisions.—1. The Bhot of Tibet. 2. The Bhután Tibetans. 3. The Ladakh Tibetans. 4. The Bulti.Conterminous.—Taking the family altogether, with the Chinese, Mongolians, Turks, Northern tribes and nations of Hindostan, North-Western tribes of the Burmese empire, and certain tribes akin to the Persians.Religion.—Chiefly Buddhism. Brahminism on the Indian frontier. Shia Mahometanism in Little Tibet.Language.—Dialects, in some cases, perhaps, independent languages, of the Tibetan.Alphabet.—Derived from the Pali of India.Physical appearance.—Mongol.

Localities.—Tibet, Bután, Ladakh, Bultistan, or Little Tibet.

Political relations.—Tibet, subject to China, Ladakh a part of the Sikh empire, Bultistan and Bután, independent.

Divisions.—1. The Bhot of Tibet. 2. The Bhután Tibetans. 3. The Ladakh Tibetans. 4. The Bulti.

Conterminous.—Taking the family altogether, with the Chinese, Mongolians, Turks, Northern tribes and nations of Hindostan, North-Western tribes of the Burmese empire, and certain tribes akin to the Persians.

Religion.—Chiefly Buddhism. Brahminism on the Indian frontier. Shia Mahometanism in Little Tibet.

Language.—Dialects, in some cases, perhaps, independent languages, of the Tibetan.

Alphabet.—Derived from the Pali of India.

Physical appearance.—Mongol.

1.—The Bhot.—These are the inhabitants of Tibet Proper, and Tangut. They are all Buddhists in the more exaggerated form; and it is in the Tibetan monasteries where the greatest abundance of Buddhist literature is tobe found. This is almost wholly religious, and in a great measure a translation from either the Sanskrit or the Pali. The first century after Christ is generally considered as the epoch at which the religion was introduced into Tibet: and this epoch is a likely one.

2.—The Tibetans of Bután.—Although Buddhists, the Tibetans of Bután have been modified by Hindu influences. Their government is that of a Rajah, and many of their outlying tribes are extended to the south of the Himalayan range.

3.—Ladakh Tibetans.—With the exception of the southern frontier of Bután, Ladakh is the portion of the Tibetan area which is best known, and where the proper Tibetan type is most subjected to foreign influences. Although the religion be the religion of Buddha, there was a short interval of Mahometanism. Originally dependent upon the Guru Lama of Hlassa, Ladakh subsequently became one of the extreme points of the Chinese empire, retaining its own princes. In the reign, however, of Aurungzeb, it was overrun by the Turks. These, however, Aurungzeb expelled at the request of the fugitive Rajah, who promised to become Mahometan in return; and kept his promise. It was broken, however, by his successor, so that the religion of Mahomet was professed for a time only. It was, however, tolerated afterwards. The last conquest of Ladakh was by the Sikhs under Runjeet Singh; and it now follows the fortunes of the Sikh dynasty. This has opened a door to the Indians of the Punjâb. To these elements of intermixture may be added, the presence of numerous settlers from Cashmir. Lastly, there is a settlement of Shia Mahometans from Little Tibet.

4.—The Bulti of Bultistan, or Little Tibet.—The most differential characteristic of the Bulti Tibetans, is thatthey are no Buddhists, but Mahometans, of the Shia persuasion, their conversion having come from Persia. It has been already stated that the Bulti enjoy a political independence.

Kunawer.(?) I have not examined how far the Kunawer tribes, located where the Sutlege breaks through the Himalayas, deserve to be classed as a separate division. At all events their language is monosyllabic (probably closely allied to the Ladakh), as may be seen in the Theburskud, Milchan, and Súmchú vocabularies of Gerard.[10]

The Polyandria of Tibet.—The current doctrine respecting the so-called Polyandria of Tibet, is that it is the common polygamy of the east reversed;i.e., that one woman marries several husbands, who may all be aliveat the same time.

What is most certain upon this obscure point is that the surviving brother inherits the wife of the one that died.

It is not so certain, although highly probably, that the wife is the property of two or more brothersat the same time.

At any rate the marriage, if so it may be called, is confined to the circle of the brothers-in-law. Perhaps the truth is that every brother-in-law is a husband.

Locality.—Tunkín and Cochin-China.Conterminouswith the Chinese; and, except so far as they are partially separated by mountain-tribes, with the Kambojians and Siamese.Religion.—Buddhism.Language.—Different from, but allied to, the Chinese.Physical Appearance.—Like that of the Chinese, except that the average height is somewhat less. Upper extremities long, lower, short and stout. Form of the skull more globular than square. Eyelids less turned than that of the Chinese.Mouth large; lips prominent, but not thick; moustache more abundant than beard; beard scanty, though encouraged. Colour more yellow than either brown or blackish. Clothing abundant.—Finlayson from Prichard.

Locality.—Tunkín and Cochin-China.

Conterminouswith the Chinese; and, except so far as they are partially separated by mountain-tribes, with the Kambojians and Siamese.

Religion.—Buddhism.

Language.—Different from, but allied to, the Chinese.

Physical Appearance.—Like that of the Chinese, except that the average height is somewhat less. Upper extremities long, lower, short and stout. Form of the skull more globular than square. Eyelids less turned than that of the Chinese.Mouth large; lips prominent, but not thick; moustache more abundant than beard; beard scanty, though encouraged. Colour more yellow than either brown or blackish. Clothing abundant.—Finlayson from Prichard.

Locality.—From the Gulf of Siam and the neck of the Malayan Peninsula to the frontiers of China. Part of Assam. Conterminous on the east, except so far as they are separated by mountain tribes, with the Anamese, and Kambojians; on the west, subject to the same limitation, with the Môn of Pegu, and the tribes of the Burmese empire. On the south with the Malays of the Malayan Peninsula.Synonym.—T'hay, the native name.Religion.—Buddhist.Alphabets.—Of Indian origin, rounded forms of the Pali.Chief Divisions.—Laos, Shyán, (Ahom?) Khamti.Physical Appearance.—Average height of twenty men, taken indiscriminately, five feet three inches, the tallest being five feet eight inches, the shortest, five feet two inches. Limbs and trunk robust. Complexion, light brown, lighter than the Malay, darker than the Chinese. Hair, black, lank, coarse and abundant. Hairy scalp descends low. Nose small, but not flattened; nostrils divergent. Sclerotica yellowish. Outer angles of the eye turned upwards. Cheek-bones broad and high. Lower jaw square, so as to look as if the parotid gland were swollen.—Crawford and Finlayson from Prichard.

Synonym.—T'hay, the native name.

Religion.—Buddhist.

Alphabets.—Of Indian origin, rounded forms of the Pali.Chief Divisions.—Laos, Shyán, (Ahom?) Khamti.

Physical Appearance.—Average height of twenty men, taken indiscriminately, five feet three inches, the tallest being five feet eight inches, the shortest, five feet two inches. Limbs and trunk robust. Complexion, light brown, lighter than the Malay, darker than the Chinese. Hair, black, lank, coarse and abundant. Hairy scalp descends low. Nose small, but not flattened; nostrils divergent. Sclerotica yellowish. Outer angles of the eye turned upwards. Cheek-bones broad and high. Lower jaw square, so as to look as if the parotid gland were swollen.—Crawford and Finlayson from Prichard.

In the history of the Siamese Tribes, the conquest of Assam is, perhaps, the most important event; and this is connected with their wide distribution.

In the lower part of the valley of Assam the language is Bengali, or nearly so; but only in the lower part. The upper half is peopled by different small mountain tribes, one of which is the Khamti.

The Khamti.—In the North Eastern corner of Assam, the Khamti are conterminous with the Singpho, Mishimi, and Miri, and are traditionally reported to have emigrated from the head-waters of the Irawaddi. In physical appearance they are middle-sized, more resembling the Chinese than any tribe on the frontier. Perhaps, a shade darker in complexion. Their alphabet is Siamese; and their language, far north as it is spoken, when compared with the Siamese of Bankok, closely resembles that dialect.In Brown's[11]Vocabularies the proportion of words, similar or identical, in Khamti and Siamese, is 92per cent.

Still it is by no means certain that the Khamti represent the original conquerors. These were Ahoms; their alphabet wasAhom, and the languageAhom. The Ahom, however, was Siamese; and probably the Khamti was a dialect of it.

The Ahom literature, preserved in the books of the Assam priesthood, is said to be remarkable for the negative fact of there being in it no traces of the Hindu religion—either Buddhist or Brahminical. This speaks much either in favour of the antiquity of the conquest, or for the recent date of the Hindu influence.

In A.D. 1695, the Brahminical religion was established in Assam: how much earlier is uncertain.

Locality.—Lower course of the Mekhong river. East of the Siamese, west of the Anamese, except so for as they may be separated by isolated mountain tribes, conterminous with these nations.

Our knowledge respecting the Kambojians is not sufficiently definite to enable us to say how far they differ, or how far they agree with certain tribes of the interior, which have been described separately. In Prichard I find that they were supposed by the Portuguese to have been derived from a warlike nation of the interior, calledKho, orGueo; who are still represented as painting and tattooing their bodies.

Now these Kho, or Gueo, are probably theKadescribed along with theChong, as a separate people. If so we are enabled to dispose of three unplaced tribes; since, by Crawfurd's Ka and Chong vocabularies we can connect, perhaps identify, them with the Kambojians.

Most of the Ka, and Chong words which are not Kambojian are either Anamitic or Môn.

Furthermore, in Crawfurd's Embassy to Siam, a vocabulary representing a fourth Kambojian dialect is given; the Khomen.

Locality.—Valley of the Irawaddi. Conterminous, save so far as interrupted by mountain-tribes, with Assam, China, Siam, and Pegu.Divisions.—1. The Myamma, or Burmese of Ava. 2. The Rhukheng, or people of Arakan.Religion.—Buddhist.Alphabet.—Of Indian origin, a rounded form of the Pali.Physical appearance.—More beard, more prominent features, and darker complexions than the Siamese, Anamese, and Chinese. Beard also more abundant. The darkness of complexion increasing towards the confines of Bengal.

Locality.—Valley of the Irawaddi. Conterminous, save so far as interrupted by mountain-tribes, with Assam, China, Siam, and Pegu.

Divisions.—1. The Myamma, or Burmese of Ava. 2. The Rhukheng, or people of Arakan.

Religion.—Buddhist.

Alphabet.—Of Indian origin, a rounded form of the Pali.

Physical appearance.—More beard, more prominent features, and darker complexions than the Siamese, Anamese, and Chinese. Beard also more abundant. The darkness of complexion increasing towards the confines of Bengal.

Back to Index Next