Chapter 33

[231]Tylor,Anthropology, p. 292; Wallaschek,loc. cit., pp. 151, 155, andMitth. Anthr. Ges. Wien., 1897, vol. xxiii., Sitzungsb., p. 11. According to the investigations of Weber, the ear can distinguish sounds which vary1⁄64th of a semitone.[232]According to Wallaschek (loc. cit., p. 155), the heptatonic scale (diatonic) owes its origin to the construction of the primitive flute, which had at most six to eight holes. To have had more would have been useless, as the instrument could not have been held without more fingers. Facility in making this instrument is due to the fact that, holes simply being pierced at regular intervals along the tube, a series of the most harmonious sounds can be obtained.[233]Here is a description of it: a quill split and cut into the form of a leaf is attached to the end of a bow (Fig.71); it is held to the mouth and set vibrating; it is then a reed and a stringed instrument combined. But it gives forth such feeble sounds that the artist is obliged to stuff one of his fingers in his nose and the other in his ear so as better to hear the music; it serves thus as a sort of microphone.[234]The only all-round study that I know is the chapter “Poetry” in Grosse’s work,Die Anf. d. Kunst, from which I borrow my account and some selected examples, which he gives from Eyre, Spencer, and Grey.[235]Deniker, “Les Kalmouks,”Rev. d’Anthr., 1884, p. 671.[236]De Quatrefages,L’espèce humaine, 2nd ed., p. 356, Paris, 1890.[237]E. B. Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. i.[238]These Yahgans give the name of “Kachpik” vaguely to: 1, very wicked imaginary beings living in the depth of the forests, and, 2, every person who has a strange or wicked character. They give the name of “Hanuch” to: 1, imaginary beings with an eye at the back of the head and no hair, and, 2, to madmen or individuals living alone in the forests. It is the belief in these three or four imaginary beings to which all religious manifestations of the Yahgans may be reduced. (Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 253.)[239]R. Woodthorpe,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxvi., No 1, August 1896. In Yorkshire the country people call the night butterfly (sphinx) “soul,” and in Ireland butterflies are the souls of ancestors (L. Gomme,Ethnology in Folklore).[240]Modigliani,Un Viaggio a Nias, p. 277, Milan, 1890. Besides, the Nias admit, like many other peoples, three souls in man; that which manifests itself by the breath is comparable to the “double” of the ancient Egyptians.[241]The word “fetichism” is a corruption of the Portuguese termfeitiço, “charm,” derived probably from the Latinfactitius, in the sense “full of magical artifices,” which the first navigators on the coast of Guinea applied to the fetiches venerated by the Negroes. Des Brosses was the first to introduce, in 1760, the term “fetichism” to denote the belief in fetiches. Auguste Comte gave a much more extended meaning to the word, to denote a religious state opposed to polytheism and monotheism. To-day the fetichism of Auguste Comte is theanimismof English ethnographers, of which true fetichism forms only a part. (E. Tylor,Prim. Cult., vol. ii., p. 143.)[242]In certain cases, fetiches are supposed to be animated with power of movement; thus the staffs which negro sorcerers put into the hands of men in convulsions, caused by wild dances, are reputed to draw these men in their mad career, and to direct them in the search of persons accused of crime. Similarly, the two staffs which the Siberian Shamans hold in their hands during their exorcisms are supposed to draw them, like horses driven at full gallop, towards regions inhabited by spirits.[243]Macpherson, quoted by Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. ii., p. 325.[244]E. Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. i., p. 427.[245]Put forward by Tylor (Prim. Cult., vol. ii., chaps. xii. and xvii.), the ideas which I here formulate have been developed by L. Marillier (“Survivance de l’âme:” Paris, 1894,Pub. École prat. Hautes Études, sect. Sc. relig.), and combated by Steinmetz (Arch. für Anthro., vol. xxiv., p. 577), but the arguments of the latter do not seem to me convincing. He compares, for example, the difference of the destiny of the noble and the common Polynesians in the other world to distributive justice.[246]Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 254.[247]E. Tylor,loc. cit., vol. ii., p. 199.[248]See A. Lang,Culture and Myth; and hisModern Mythology, London, 1897.[249]Legends, traditional tales, proverbs, etc., are simplified myths, with the poetic element predominating. The study of them forms a special branch of ethnology called “Folk-lore.”[250]Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 316.[251]Brough Smyth,The Aborigines of Victoria, vol. ii., p. 3, London, 1878; Curr,The Australian Race, Melbourne-London, 1886–87, 4 vols.passim.[252]R. Schramm, “Jahrform, etc.,”Mittheil. der Geogr. Gesell., vol. xxvii., 1884, p. 481, Vienna.[253]O. Mason,Origins of Invention, pp. 71 and 116.[254]Brough Smyth,loc. cit., vol. i., p. 284.[255]Schmeltz and Krause, “Museum Godeffroy,” Hamburg, 1881, p. 271 and plate xxxii.[256]S. Holm,Meddelels. om Groenl., p. 101, Copenhagen, 1887.[257]See for the details, Andree,Ethn. Paral., p. 197.[258]See Max Bartels,Medecin der Naturvölker, Leipzig, 1893.[259]M. Monnier,La France Noire, p. 110, Paris, 1894.[260]H. Schintz,Deutsch Süd-west Africa, p. 396, Oldenburg, 1894.[261]S. Wilken,Verglijk.Volkenkunde van Nederl. Ind., p. 293, Leyden, 1893; Ivanowsky,loc. cit., p. 19 of the original impression; Post,Grundz. ethnol. Jurisprud., vol. i., Oldenb.-Leipzig, 1894.[262]Bartels, “Reife-Unsitten, etc.,”Zeit. f. Ethn.,1896 (Verh., p. 363).[263]Giraud-Teulon,Origines du mariage et de la famille, p. 33, note, Paris, 1884; Wilken,loc. cit., p. 294.[264]See for further details, Letourneau,The Evolution of Marriage, etc., chap. i., London; and Westermarck,History of Human Marriage, chaps. iv. to vi., London, 1891.[265]Lubbock,Origin of Civilisation, chap. iii., 1875.[266]The long list of peoples practising promiscuity given by Lubbock dwindles as we become better acquainted with the different populations in question. Certain peoples, like the Fuegians (Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit.), the Bushmen, the Polynesians (Westermarck,loc. cit.), the Irulas (Thurston,Bull. Madras Mus., vol. ii., No. 1, 1897), the Teehurs of Oude (W. Crooke,Tribes and Castes N. W. Province, etc., vol. i., p. clxxxiii., Calcutta, 1896), should be mercilessly struck out of this list, since they all have individual marriage to the exclusion of other forms. Others, like the Australians, the Todas, the Nairs, have been entered in it because they practise “group marriage” or certain forms of polyandry, which is not the same thing as promiscuity. There remains of the list but two or three tribes about whom we have no exact general information at all (example, the Olo-Ot of Borneo).[267]A. W. Howitt, “Australian Group Relations,”Smithsonian Rep., Washington, 1883; A. W. Howitt and L. Fison, “Kamilaroi and Kurnai,” Melbourne-Sydney, 1880, andJourn. Anthr. Inst., vol. xii., p. 30, 1882.[268]A. W. Howitt, “Dieri, etc.,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xx., 1890, p. 53. Among the Nairs of the coast of Malabar things are done in exactly the same way. The main point in both cases is the prohibition of marriage in the clan itself (L. Fison, “Classificat. Relationship,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxv., 1895, p. 369). Among the Todas of Nilgiri the groups are limited in this sense, that the men who cohabit with a woman must be brothers, and at the same time can only marry with the sisters of this woman.[269]Bachofen,Das Mutterrecht, Stuttgart, 1861; J. F. McLennan,Studies in Ancient History, London, 1876.[270]L. Fison,loc. cit.,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxiv., 1895, p. 36.[271]Thus, if there are four clans, A, B, C, and D, as among the Kamilaroi, for example, the children sprung from the parents of the clans A and B may not intermarry; they belong to the clan C, the members of which may only marry with the members of the clan D. It is their children only who will be able to contract marriages in the groups A and B. In this way incest is only possible between the grandfather and the granddaughter, that is to say, reduced practically to zero.[272]L. Morgan, “Syst. of Consanguinity, etc.,”Smithson. Contrib. Knowl., vol. xvii., Washington, 1871; andAncient Society, London, 1877. See also the very clear statement of the system in Lubbock,loc. cit., and its extension to the Australians and the Melanesians of the Fiji Islands in Howitt and Fison,loc. cit.[273]Tylor,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol xviii., 1888–89, p. 262.[274]Westermarck,loc. cit., p. 82; L. Fison,loc. cit.(“Classific. System”), p. 369.[275]Maine,Ancient Law, p. 241, London, 1885; Westermarck,loc. cit., p. 510.[276]Shortt,Transact. Ethn. Soc., London, N.S., vol. vii., p. 264; Haxthausen,Transcaucasia, p. 403, London, 1854. Leroy-Beaulieu (L’Empire des Tzars, vol. vi., chap. 5, p. 488, Paris, 1885–89) attributes this custom to the over-exercise of paternal authority.[277]The Torgoot Mongols, who practise this custom, explain it by the general rules of hospitality (Ivanovski,loc. cit.); in this respect they are in agreement with Westermarck,loc. cit., chap. vi.[278]It must be observed on this point that, according to Westermarck, the horror of incest is not an instinctive sentiment (animals do not have it), but rather a social habit springing from sexual repulsion for persons, even unrelated to the family, with whom one has been brought up from infancy. Thus we often see marriages prohibited between one village and another (ancient Peru), or between god-parents, who superintend the baptism of a child, and are in no way allied to each other by blood (Russia). The learned Helsingfors professor, who believes in the omnipotence of sexual selection, explains the frequency of the aversion to incest by the survival of individuals who did not contract consanguineous marriages, always mischievous in his opinion. However, he admits that the bad effects of consanguineous marriages may be mitigated by material well-being, as is the case in Europe.[279]See Ploss,Das Weib, 5th ed., vol. ii., 1897, Leipzig.[280]E. Tylor,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xviii., p. 248.[281]Ploss (loc. cit.) mentions Australian, Eskimo, and North American Indian tribes among whom the child is suckled till the age of fourteen or fifteen.[282]For an illustration of this see the “Description of Australian Initiation” (Bura), by R. Mathews,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxv., 1896, No. 4.[283]Deniker, “Le peuple Tchouktch, etc.” (from Avgustinovich),Rev. d’Anthr., 1882, p. 323, and De Windt,Globus, 1897, vol. lxxi., p. 300.[284]Tylor,loc. cit.(Anthr.), pp. 346, 420.[285]In various countries in Europe these objects give place to a piece of money put into the mouth or the hand of the dead; as one never knows what may happen, it is always well to have a little money at one’s service.[286]Many practices in relation to the dead are explained by the belief that they are sleeping for a greater or less time (see p.216). Thus, among the Micronesians of the Gilbert Islands, the woman sleeps by the side of her dead husband, and covers her body with the putrid matter which oozes from the corpse.[287]Even in the cases where several arrows have pierced the animal their reciprocal positions decided to whom belonged such or such part of the slain animal; the skin, for instance, was his whose arrow had penetrated nearest to the heart.[288]Kovalewsky,Tableau des origines de la famille, etc., pp. 59 and 91, Stockholm, 1890; Maine,Early History of Institutions, London, 1875.[289]G. L. Gomme,The Village Community, London, 1890; and Kovalewsky,loc. cit.Baden-Powell,Indian Village Com., London, 1896.[290]J. G. Frazer,Totemism, London, 1887 (expanded from his article in vol. xxiii. of theEncyclopædia Britannica); E. Smith,Second Ann. Rep. Bur. of Ethnol., 1880–81, p. 77, Washington, 1883.[291]This familyrégimeof society is closely allied to the worship of ancestors and the “hearth,” as the names given to the communities show (“feu” in France, “pechtchiché” in the Ukraine).[292]Laveleye,Propriété primitive, p. 9, Paris, 1891; Kovalewsky,loc. cit.,passim; Sakuya Yoshida,Geschichtl. Entwickl. d. Staats-Verfass. in Japan, p. 46, Hague, 1890; Bancroft,Native Races of Pacific States, vol. ii., p. 226, San Francisco, 1882.[293]See Andree,Ethnolog. Parallele, p. 250.[294]See for further details, Post,loc. cit.,Grundriss der ethnol. Jurisprud., vol. i.[295]See for more details, Ch. Letourneau,L’évolution de la Morale, Paris, 1887, and A. Post,loc. cit., 2nd vol., Leipzig, 1895.[296]The most common ordeals are the trial by water (swimming across a river, remaining some time under water, etc.) and that by fire. In the latter case the accused is made to run on hot coals, as in India, among the Somalis, in Siam; to lick red-hot iron, as among the Dyaks, the Khonds, the Negroes of Sierra-Leone; or again, to dip the hands in molten lead, as in Burma among the Jakuns of Malacca, or the Alfurus of Buru, etc.[297]Schmeltz and Krause,Ethnogr.-Anthr. Abt. Mus. Godeffroy, p. 17, Hamburg, 1881; W. Powell,Wanderings amongst Cannibals of New Britain, London, 1883; Graf von Pfeil, “Duk-Duk, etc.,”Journ. Anthr. Institute, 1897, p. 197.[298]G. Schultheiss,Globus, 1896, vol. lxx., No. 22.[299]The custom of applying the nose to the cheek and drawing a breath, with closed eyes and a smacking of the lips, exists among the Southern Chinese, but only as an act of love. According to P. D’Enjoy, it is an olfactory gesture derived from the sensations of nutrition, as the European kiss on the lips is derived from the lascivious bite. (Bull. Soc. Anthr., Paris, 1897, pt. 2.)[300]See for details Ling Roth,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xix., 1889, p. 164; Andree,Eth. Paral., N.F., p. 225; Hellwald,Rosselsp., p. 1.[301]The difference between offensive and defensive weapons is often not very marked even in our civilisation; thus the sword and the sabre serve as much for giving as warding off blows; the same is true among savages in regard to the staff, the club, etc. Frequently, too, objects which originally have nothing in common with war, become offensive or defensive weapons. Thus the bracelet is sometimes a defensive weapon. Among several Negroes (Ashantis, Kafirs, Vakambas), and in Melanesia, warriors put on their legs and arms bracelets formed of the long hair of different animals (goat, boar, zebra) which almost completely cover the limbs and protect them effectually against the blows of club and spear. The bracelets of wire rolled in numerous spirals around the fore-arm or the leg, which are met with among the Dyaks, the Mois of Indo-China, the Niam-Niams, and the Baghirmis of Central Africa, are veritable protective armour; they are the prototypes of the vantbrace and greaves.In certain rarer cases the bracelet is an offensive weapon. Among the Jurs, a negro tribe of the upper Nile, bracelets are found provided with two points or spurs, four inches long, and very dangerous. The bracelet of the Irengas (to the east of the upper Nile), as well as that of the Jibba (living on the banks of the Jibba, a left-hand tributary of the Sabba), is a great disc, with an opening in the middle through which to pass the arm. A portion of the disc is removed in order to give it more elasticity, and its outer edge, exceedingly sharp, forms a kind of circular sabre. In order not to wound himself, the wearer covers the edge with a circular case which he only removes for battle.[302]See for details and series of forms, Lane-Fox (now Pitt Rivers),Cat. Anthr. Collection in the Bethnal Green Museum, London, 1877, with illustrations. (The remarkable collection in question is now at Oxford.)[303]O. Mason, “Throwing-sticks,”Rep. U.S. N. Mus. for 1884; F. v. Luschan, “Wurfholz, etc.,”Festschr.... Bastian, p. 131, Berlin, 1896.[304]See H. Balfour, “On the Structure and Affinities of the Composite Bow,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., London, 1889, vol. xix., p. 220; Anuchin,Look i Strely(Bow and Arrows), Moscow, 1889 (in Russian); O. Mason, “Bows, Arrows, and Quivers of the North American Aborigines,”Smithsonian Report, Washington, 1893.[305]Phillips,Trans. N. Zeal. Inst., vol. x., p. 97, Wellington, 1877.[306]M. Buch,Die Wotiaken, p. 78, Helsingfors, 1882; Extract fromActa Soc. Scient. Fennicæ, vol. xii.[307]The prototype of thetrue composite bow, characterised by the addition to it of a mass of moistened sinews which, on drying, make the bow curve up, must have had another form; it bore a resemblance probably to the bow of the Indian tribes of the north-west of America and of California, in which the sinew covering often goes beyond the body of the bow and hangs down at its two extremities.The improved forms of the composite bow are only found on the Asiatic continent. The so-called “Tatar” or Mongolian bow, the Chinese “kung,” is chiefly composed of a piece of wood to which is fixed with bird-lime on the inner side a piece of horn, and on the outer side two layers of sinews covered with two layers of birch-bark. All other composite bows, Persian, Hindu, etc., are only complicated forms of this type, to which we may also refer the exceptional types of bow of the Lapp and Javanese, etc.Accepting the view of General Pitt Rivers,loc. cit., we may say that the composite bow is not a more perfect weapon than the simple bow, and that it could only have had its origin in countries where the absence of very elastic varieties of wood make it necessary to seek in the superposition of various materials the elasticity required to augment the force of the weapon.[308]The substance used in the manufacture of the bow-string varies with the region; thus in the west of Africa it is always of rattan, as far as Butembo (country of the Ponondas), where strings ofCrotalariaand bamboo begin to be used. (Weule,Ethnol. Notizblatt. Mus. Berlin, vol. i., No. 2, p. 39, 1895–96.)[309]E. Morse, “Ancient and Modern Methods of Arrow-release,”Essex Inst. Bull., Salem, Oct.-Dec., 1885.[310]With regard to greaves, see the note on p. 257.[311]W. Hough, “Prim. Am. Armour,”Rep. U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1893, p. 625, Washington, 1895.[312]O. Mason,loc. cit., p. 364.[313]Letourneau,L’évolution du commerce, Paris, 1897.[314]Kubary,Ethn. Beitr. Karolinen-Archipel., p. 1, Leyden, 1889–95.[315]Balfour,Journ. Anthro. Inst., vol. xix., 1889, p. 54.[316]Nillsson,Ureinwohner Skand. Nordens, p. 37, Hamburg, 1866, i. Nachtr.[317]Cooper,The Mishmee Hills, London, 1873.[318]It is the English who have given to this porcelain the name ofcaurior cowry, which appears to be a corruption of the Sanscrit wordKaparda,Kapardika, whenceKavariin the Mahratta dialect; the Portuguese call itBoujiorBoughi; the inhabitants of the Maldives,boli; the Siamese,bios(which means shell in general in their language); the Arabs,waddaorvadaat.[319]Martens, “Über verschiedene Verwendungen von Conchylien,”Zeit. für Ethn., Berlin, 1872, vol. iv., p. 65; Andree,Ethnol. Parall., p. 233; Stearns, “Ethno-conchology,”Report U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1887.[320]In 1858, 2,938 piculs of cowry-shells (about 177 tons) were exported from Manilla, for the most part to England. In 1848,591⁄2tons of cowries were imported into Liverpool. At the time of the Dutch dominion of Ceylon, Amsterdam was the principal market of this trade; there were sold there in 1689 192,951 pounds (Dutch) of these shells; and in 1780 133,229 pounds (Johnston).[321]O. Mason,loc. cit., p. 327, and “Prim. Travel and Transport,”Smithsonian Report U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1894, p. 239, Washington, 1896.[322]D. Anuchin, “Sani, etc.” (The sledge, the canoe, and horses in funeral rites, in Russian),Drévnosti(Antiquities), vol. xiv., Moscow, 1890.[323]See the Assyrian bas-reliefs, Maspero,Hist. anc. de l’Orient, vol. ii., p. 628, Paris, 1897; O. Mason,Origins of Invention, p. 334; and Moser,A travers l’Asie Centrale, p. 220, Paris, 1885.[324]See for the history of classifications, Topinard,L’Anthr. gén., pp. 28–107, 264–349; Giglioli,Viaggio ... della Magenta, p. xxvii., Milan, 1875; and Keane,Ethnology, p. 162, Cambridge, 1896.[325]Principal Races.Secondary Races.(1) Caucasian.(1) Caucasian, (2) Alleghanian (Red Indian).(2) Mongolian.(3) Hyperborean (Lapps), (4) Malay, (5) American(except the Red Indian), (6) Mongolian, (7) Paraborean(Eskimo), (8) Australian.(3) Ethiopian.(9) Kafir, (10) Ethiopian, (11) Negro, (12) Melanesian.(4) Hottentot.(13) Hottentot.—Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, “Classif. Anthropologique,”Mem. Soc. Anthr. Paris, vol. i., p. 125, 1861.[326]Principal Races.Secondary Races or “Modifications.”(1) Negroid.(1) Bushmen, (2) Negro, (3) Papuan.(2) Australoid.(4) Australians, (5) Black race of Deccan(Dravidians),(6) Ethiopian (Hamite).(3) Mongoloid.(7) Mongol, (8) Polynesian, (9) American,(10) Eskimo, (11) Malay.(4) Xanthochroid.(12) Xanthochroid of Northern Europe.(5) Melanochroid.(13) Melanochroid of Southern Europe, (14) Melanochroidof Asia (Arabs, Afghans, Hindus, etc.).—T. Huxley, “Geogr. Distrib. of Mankind,”Journ. Ethnol. Soc. London, N.S., vol. ii., p. 404, map, 1870. The classification of Flower (Jl. Anthro. Inst., vol. xiv., 1885, p. 378) differs from that of Huxley in a few details only. This eminent anatomist grouped his eleven races and three sub-races under three “types”—Negro, Mongolian, and Caucasian.[327]In the first edition of his classification (Rev. d’Anthr., 2nd series, vol. i., p. 509, Paris, 1878), Topinard admits sixteen races in three groups:—(a)Straight-haired Races.—Eskimo, Red Indians, Mexico-Peruvians, Guarani-Caribs, Mongols.(b)Wavy or Frizzy-haired Races.—Fair-haired people of Europe (Xanthochroids of Huxley), dark-haired people of Europe and Semites (Melanochroids of Huxley), Australians and Indo-Abyssinians (Australoids of Huxley), Fulbé, Finns, Celto-Slavs, Turanians.(c)Woolly-haired Races.—Bushmen, Papuans, Kafirs, Negritoes.In the second edition, dating from 1885 (Elém. Anthr. gén., p. 502), we find nineteen races grouped under three heads:—(a)White Leptorhine Races.—Anglo-Scandinavians, Finns (first type, Western), Mediterraneans, Semito-Egyptians, Lapono-Ligurians, Celto-Slavs.(b)Yellow Mesorhine Races.—Eskimo, Tehuelches, Polynesians, Red Indians, yellow peoples of Asia (including Finns of the second type), Guaranis (or South Americans, except the Tehuelches), Peruvians.(c)Black Platyrhine Races.—Australians, Bushmen, Melanesians, Negroes, Tasmanians, Negritoes.

[232]According to Wallaschek (loc. cit., p. 155), the heptatonic scale (diatonic) owes its origin to the construction of the primitive flute, which had at most six to eight holes. To have had more would have been useless, as the instrument could not have been held without more fingers. Facility in making this instrument is due to the fact that, holes simply being pierced at regular intervals along the tube, a series of the most harmonious sounds can be obtained.

[233]Here is a description of it: a quill split and cut into the form of a leaf is attached to the end of a bow (Fig.71); it is held to the mouth and set vibrating; it is then a reed and a stringed instrument combined. But it gives forth such feeble sounds that the artist is obliged to stuff one of his fingers in his nose and the other in his ear so as better to hear the music; it serves thus as a sort of microphone.

[234]The only all-round study that I know is the chapter “Poetry” in Grosse’s work,Die Anf. d. Kunst, from which I borrow my account and some selected examples, which he gives from Eyre, Spencer, and Grey.

[235]Deniker, “Les Kalmouks,”Rev. d’Anthr., 1884, p. 671.

[236]De Quatrefages,L’espèce humaine, 2nd ed., p. 356, Paris, 1890.

[237]E. B. Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. i.

[238]These Yahgans give the name of “Kachpik” vaguely to: 1, very wicked imaginary beings living in the depth of the forests, and, 2, every person who has a strange or wicked character. They give the name of “Hanuch” to: 1, imaginary beings with an eye at the back of the head and no hair, and, 2, to madmen or individuals living alone in the forests. It is the belief in these three or four imaginary beings to which all religious manifestations of the Yahgans may be reduced. (Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 253.)

[239]R. Woodthorpe,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxvi., No 1, August 1896. In Yorkshire the country people call the night butterfly (sphinx) “soul,” and in Ireland butterflies are the souls of ancestors (L. Gomme,Ethnology in Folklore).

[240]Modigliani,Un Viaggio a Nias, p. 277, Milan, 1890. Besides, the Nias admit, like many other peoples, three souls in man; that which manifests itself by the breath is comparable to the “double” of the ancient Egyptians.

[241]The word “fetichism” is a corruption of the Portuguese termfeitiço, “charm,” derived probably from the Latinfactitius, in the sense “full of magical artifices,” which the first navigators on the coast of Guinea applied to the fetiches venerated by the Negroes. Des Brosses was the first to introduce, in 1760, the term “fetichism” to denote the belief in fetiches. Auguste Comte gave a much more extended meaning to the word, to denote a religious state opposed to polytheism and monotheism. To-day the fetichism of Auguste Comte is theanimismof English ethnographers, of which true fetichism forms only a part. (E. Tylor,Prim. Cult., vol. ii., p. 143.)

[242]In certain cases, fetiches are supposed to be animated with power of movement; thus the staffs which negro sorcerers put into the hands of men in convulsions, caused by wild dances, are reputed to draw these men in their mad career, and to direct them in the search of persons accused of crime. Similarly, the two staffs which the Siberian Shamans hold in their hands during their exorcisms are supposed to draw them, like horses driven at full gallop, towards regions inhabited by spirits.

[243]Macpherson, quoted by Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. ii., p. 325.

[244]E. Tylor,Primitive Culture, vol. i., p. 427.

[245]Put forward by Tylor (Prim. Cult., vol. ii., chaps. xii. and xvii.), the ideas which I here formulate have been developed by L. Marillier (“Survivance de l’âme:” Paris, 1894,Pub. École prat. Hautes Études, sect. Sc. relig.), and combated by Steinmetz (Arch. für Anthro., vol. xxiv., p. 577), but the arguments of the latter do not seem to me convincing. He compares, for example, the difference of the destiny of the noble and the common Polynesians in the other world to distributive justice.

[246]Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 254.

[247]E. Tylor,loc. cit., vol. ii., p. 199.

[248]See A. Lang,Culture and Myth; and hisModern Mythology, London, 1897.

[249]Legends, traditional tales, proverbs, etc., are simplified myths, with the poetic element predominating. The study of them forms a special branch of ethnology called “Folk-lore.”

[250]Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit., p. 316.

[251]Brough Smyth,The Aborigines of Victoria, vol. ii., p. 3, London, 1878; Curr,The Australian Race, Melbourne-London, 1886–87, 4 vols.passim.

[252]R. Schramm, “Jahrform, etc.,”Mittheil. der Geogr. Gesell., vol. xxvii., 1884, p. 481, Vienna.

[253]O. Mason,Origins of Invention, pp. 71 and 116.

[254]Brough Smyth,loc. cit., vol. i., p. 284.

[255]Schmeltz and Krause, “Museum Godeffroy,” Hamburg, 1881, p. 271 and plate xxxii.

[256]S. Holm,Meddelels. om Groenl., p. 101, Copenhagen, 1887.

[257]See for the details, Andree,Ethn. Paral., p. 197.

[258]See Max Bartels,Medecin der Naturvölker, Leipzig, 1893.

[259]M. Monnier,La France Noire, p. 110, Paris, 1894.

[260]H. Schintz,Deutsch Süd-west Africa, p. 396, Oldenburg, 1894.

[261]S. Wilken,Verglijk.Volkenkunde van Nederl. Ind., p. 293, Leyden, 1893; Ivanowsky,loc. cit., p. 19 of the original impression; Post,Grundz. ethnol. Jurisprud., vol. i., Oldenb.-Leipzig, 1894.

[262]Bartels, “Reife-Unsitten, etc.,”Zeit. f. Ethn.,1896 (Verh., p. 363).

[263]Giraud-Teulon,Origines du mariage et de la famille, p. 33, note, Paris, 1884; Wilken,loc. cit., p. 294.

[264]See for further details, Letourneau,The Evolution of Marriage, etc., chap. i., London; and Westermarck,History of Human Marriage, chaps. iv. to vi., London, 1891.

[265]Lubbock,Origin of Civilisation, chap. iii., 1875.

[266]The long list of peoples practising promiscuity given by Lubbock dwindles as we become better acquainted with the different populations in question. Certain peoples, like the Fuegians (Hyades and Deniker,loc. cit.), the Bushmen, the Polynesians (Westermarck,loc. cit.), the Irulas (Thurston,Bull. Madras Mus., vol. ii., No. 1, 1897), the Teehurs of Oude (W. Crooke,Tribes and Castes N. W. Province, etc., vol. i., p. clxxxiii., Calcutta, 1896), should be mercilessly struck out of this list, since they all have individual marriage to the exclusion of other forms. Others, like the Australians, the Todas, the Nairs, have been entered in it because they practise “group marriage” or certain forms of polyandry, which is not the same thing as promiscuity. There remains of the list but two or three tribes about whom we have no exact general information at all (example, the Olo-Ot of Borneo).

[267]A. W. Howitt, “Australian Group Relations,”Smithsonian Rep., Washington, 1883; A. W. Howitt and L. Fison, “Kamilaroi and Kurnai,” Melbourne-Sydney, 1880, andJourn. Anthr. Inst., vol. xii., p. 30, 1882.

[268]A. W. Howitt, “Dieri, etc.,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xx., 1890, p. 53. Among the Nairs of the coast of Malabar things are done in exactly the same way. The main point in both cases is the prohibition of marriage in the clan itself (L. Fison, “Classificat. Relationship,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxv., 1895, p. 369). Among the Todas of Nilgiri the groups are limited in this sense, that the men who cohabit with a woman must be brothers, and at the same time can only marry with the sisters of this woman.

[269]Bachofen,Das Mutterrecht, Stuttgart, 1861; J. F. McLennan,Studies in Ancient History, London, 1876.

[270]L. Fison,loc. cit.,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxiv., 1895, p. 36.

[271]Thus, if there are four clans, A, B, C, and D, as among the Kamilaroi, for example, the children sprung from the parents of the clans A and B may not intermarry; they belong to the clan C, the members of which may only marry with the members of the clan D. It is their children only who will be able to contract marriages in the groups A and B. In this way incest is only possible between the grandfather and the granddaughter, that is to say, reduced practically to zero.

[272]L. Morgan, “Syst. of Consanguinity, etc.,”Smithson. Contrib. Knowl., vol. xvii., Washington, 1871; andAncient Society, London, 1877. See also the very clear statement of the system in Lubbock,loc. cit., and its extension to the Australians and the Melanesians of the Fiji Islands in Howitt and Fison,loc. cit.

[273]Tylor,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol xviii., 1888–89, p. 262.

[274]Westermarck,loc. cit., p. 82; L. Fison,loc. cit.(“Classific. System”), p. 369.

[275]Maine,Ancient Law, p. 241, London, 1885; Westermarck,loc. cit., p. 510.

[276]Shortt,Transact. Ethn. Soc., London, N.S., vol. vii., p. 264; Haxthausen,Transcaucasia, p. 403, London, 1854. Leroy-Beaulieu (L’Empire des Tzars, vol. vi., chap. 5, p. 488, Paris, 1885–89) attributes this custom to the over-exercise of paternal authority.

[277]The Torgoot Mongols, who practise this custom, explain it by the general rules of hospitality (Ivanovski,loc. cit.); in this respect they are in agreement with Westermarck,loc. cit., chap. vi.

[278]It must be observed on this point that, according to Westermarck, the horror of incest is not an instinctive sentiment (animals do not have it), but rather a social habit springing from sexual repulsion for persons, even unrelated to the family, with whom one has been brought up from infancy. Thus we often see marriages prohibited between one village and another (ancient Peru), or between god-parents, who superintend the baptism of a child, and are in no way allied to each other by blood (Russia). The learned Helsingfors professor, who believes in the omnipotence of sexual selection, explains the frequency of the aversion to incest by the survival of individuals who did not contract consanguineous marriages, always mischievous in his opinion. However, he admits that the bad effects of consanguineous marriages may be mitigated by material well-being, as is the case in Europe.

[279]See Ploss,Das Weib, 5th ed., vol. ii., 1897, Leipzig.

[280]E. Tylor,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xviii., p. 248.

[281]Ploss (loc. cit.) mentions Australian, Eskimo, and North American Indian tribes among whom the child is suckled till the age of fourteen or fifteen.

[282]For an illustration of this see the “Description of Australian Initiation” (Bura), by R. Mathews,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xxv., 1896, No. 4.

[283]Deniker, “Le peuple Tchouktch, etc.” (from Avgustinovich),Rev. d’Anthr., 1882, p. 323, and De Windt,Globus, 1897, vol. lxxi., p. 300.

[284]Tylor,loc. cit.(Anthr.), pp. 346, 420.

[285]In various countries in Europe these objects give place to a piece of money put into the mouth or the hand of the dead; as one never knows what may happen, it is always well to have a little money at one’s service.

[286]Many practices in relation to the dead are explained by the belief that they are sleeping for a greater or less time (see p.216). Thus, among the Micronesians of the Gilbert Islands, the woman sleeps by the side of her dead husband, and covers her body with the putrid matter which oozes from the corpse.

[287]Even in the cases where several arrows have pierced the animal their reciprocal positions decided to whom belonged such or such part of the slain animal; the skin, for instance, was his whose arrow had penetrated nearest to the heart.

[288]Kovalewsky,Tableau des origines de la famille, etc., pp. 59 and 91, Stockholm, 1890; Maine,Early History of Institutions, London, 1875.

[289]G. L. Gomme,The Village Community, London, 1890; and Kovalewsky,loc. cit.Baden-Powell,Indian Village Com., London, 1896.

[290]J. G. Frazer,Totemism, London, 1887 (expanded from his article in vol. xxiii. of theEncyclopædia Britannica); E. Smith,Second Ann. Rep. Bur. of Ethnol., 1880–81, p. 77, Washington, 1883.

[291]This familyrégimeof society is closely allied to the worship of ancestors and the “hearth,” as the names given to the communities show (“feu” in France, “pechtchiché” in the Ukraine).

[292]Laveleye,Propriété primitive, p. 9, Paris, 1891; Kovalewsky,loc. cit.,passim; Sakuya Yoshida,Geschichtl. Entwickl. d. Staats-Verfass. in Japan, p. 46, Hague, 1890; Bancroft,Native Races of Pacific States, vol. ii., p. 226, San Francisco, 1882.

[293]See Andree,Ethnolog. Parallele, p. 250.

[294]See for further details, Post,loc. cit.,Grundriss der ethnol. Jurisprud., vol. i.

[295]See for more details, Ch. Letourneau,L’évolution de la Morale, Paris, 1887, and A. Post,loc. cit., 2nd vol., Leipzig, 1895.

[296]The most common ordeals are the trial by water (swimming across a river, remaining some time under water, etc.) and that by fire. In the latter case the accused is made to run on hot coals, as in India, among the Somalis, in Siam; to lick red-hot iron, as among the Dyaks, the Khonds, the Negroes of Sierra-Leone; or again, to dip the hands in molten lead, as in Burma among the Jakuns of Malacca, or the Alfurus of Buru, etc.

[297]Schmeltz and Krause,Ethnogr.-Anthr. Abt. Mus. Godeffroy, p. 17, Hamburg, 1881; W. Powell,Wanderings amongst Cannibals of New Britain, London, 1883; Graf von Pfeil, “Duk-Duk, etc.,”Journ. Anthr. Institute, 1897, p. 197.

[298]G. Schultheiss,Globus, 1896, vol. lxx., No. 22.

[299]The custom of applying the nose to the cheek and drawing a breath, with closed eyes and a smacking of the lips, exists among the Southern Chinese, but only as an act of love. According to P. D’Enjoy, it is an olfactory gesture derived from the sensations of nutrition, as the European kiss on the lips is derived from the lascivious bite. (Bull. Soc. Anthr., Paris, 1897, pt. 2.)

[300]See for details Ling Roth,Journ. Anthr. Inst., vol. xix., 1889, p. 164; Andree,Eth. Paral., N.F., p. 225; Hellwald,Rosselsp., p. 1.

[301]The difference between offensive and defensive weapons is often not very marked even in our civilisation; thus the sword and the sabre serve as much for giving as warding off blows; the same is true among savages in regard to the staff, the club, etc. Frequently, too, objects which originally have nothing in common with war, become offensive or defensive weapons. Thus the bracelet is sometimes a defensive weapon. Among several Negroes (Ashantis, Kafirs, Vakambas), and in Melanesia, warriors put on their legs and arms bracelets formed of the long hair of different animals (goat, boar, zebra) which almost completely cover the limbs and protect them effectually against the blows of club and spear. The bracelets of wire rolled in numerous spirals around the fore-arm or the leg, which are met with among the Dyaks, the Mois of Indo-China, the Niam-Niams, and the Baghirmis of Central Africa, are veritable protective armour; they are the prototypes of the vantbrace and greaves.In certain rarer cases the bracelet is an offensive weapon. Among the Jurs, a negro tribe of the upper Nile, bracelets are found provided with two points or spurs, four inches long, and very dangerous. The bracelet of the Irengas (to the east of the upper Nile), as well as that of the Jibba (living on the banks of the Jibba, a left-hand tributary of the Sabba), is a great disc, with an opening in the middle through which to pass the arm. A portion of the disc is removed in order to give it more elasticity, and its outer edge, exceedingly sharp, forms a kind of circular sabre. In order not to wound himself, the wearer covers the edge with a circular case which he only removes for battle.

In certain rarer cases the bracelet is an offensive weapon. Among the Jurs, a negro tribe of the upper Nile, bracelets are found provided with two points or spurs, four inches long, and very dangerous. The bracelet of the Irengas (to the east of the upper Nile), as well as that of the Jibba (living on the banks of the Jibba, a left-hand tributary of the Sabba), is a great disc, with an opening in the middle through which to pass the arm. A portion of the disc is removed in order to give it more elasticity, and its outer edge, exceedingly sharp, forms a kind of circular sabre. In order not to wound himself, the wearer covers the edge with a circular case which he only removes for battle.

[302]See for details and series of forms, Lane-Fox (now Pitt Rivers),Cat. Anthr. Collection in the Bethnal Green Museum, London, 1877, with illustrations. (The remarkable collection in question is now at Oxford.)

[303]O. Mason, “Throwing-sticks,”Rep. U.S. N. Mus. for 1884; F. v. Luschan, “Wurfholz, etc.,”Festschr.... Bastian, p. 131, Berlin, 1896.

[304]See H. Balfour, “On the Structure and Affinities of the Composite Bow,”Journ. Anthr. Inst., London, 1889, vol. xix., p. 220; Anuchin,Look i Strely(Bow and Arrows), Moscow, 1889 (in Russian); O. Mason, “Bows, Arrows, and Quivers of the North American Aborigines,”Smithsonian Report, Washington, 1893.

[305]Phillips,Trans. N. Zeal. Inst., vol. x., p. 97, Wellington, 1877.

[306]M. Buch,Die Wotiaken, p. 78, Helsingfors, 1882; Extract fromActa Soc. Scient. Fennicæ, vol. xii.

[307]The prototype of thetrue composite bow, characterised by the addition to it of a mass of moistened sinews which, on drying, make the bow curve up, must have had another form; it bore a resemblance probably to the bow of the Indian tribes of the north-west of America and of California, in which the sinew covering often goes beyond the body of the bow and hangs down at its two extremities.The improved forms of the composite bow are only found on the Asiatic continent. The so-called “Tatar” or Mongolian bow, the Chinese “kung,” is chiefly composed of a piece of wood to which is fixed with bird-lime on the inner side a piece of horn, and on the outer side two layers of sinews covered with two layers of birch-bark. All other composite bows, Persian, Hindu, etc., are only complicated forms of this type, to which we may also refer the exceptional types of bow of the Lapp and Javanese, etc.Accepting the view of General Pitt Rivers,loc. cit., we may say that the composite bow is not a more perfect weapon than the simple bow, and that it could only have had its origin in countries where the absence of very elastic varieties of wood make it necessary to seek in the superposition of various materials the elasticity required to augment the force of the weapon.

The improved forms of the composite bow are only found on the Asiatic continent. The so-called “Tatar” or Mongolian bow, the Chinese “kung,” is chiefly composed of a piece of wood to which is fixed with bird-lime on the inner side a piece of horn, and on the outer side two layers of sinews covered with two layers of birch-bark. All other composite bows, Persian, Hindu, etc., are only complicated forms of this type, to which we may also refer the exceptional types of bow of the Lapp and Javanese, etc.

Accepting the view of General Pitt Rivers,loc. cit., we may say that the composite bow is not a more perfect weapon than the simple bow, and that it could only have had its origin in countries where the absence of very elastic varieties of wood make it necessary to seek in the superposition of various materials the elasticity required to augment the force of the weapon.

[308]The substance used in the manufacture of the bow-string varies with the region; thus in the west of Africa it is always of rattan, as far as Butembo (country of the Ponondas), where strings ofCrotalariaand bamboo begin to be used. (Weule,Ethnol. Notizblatt. Mus. Berlin, vol. i., No. 2, p. 39, 1895–96.)

[309]E. Morse, “Ancient and Modern Methods of Arrow-release,”Essex Inst. Bull., Salem, Oct.-Dec., 1885.

[310]With regard to greaves, see the note on p. 257.

[311]W. Hough, “Prim. Am. Armour,”Rep. U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1893, p. 625, Washington, 1895.

[312]O. Mason,loc. cit., p. 364.

[313]Letourneau,L’évolution du commerce, Paris, 1897.

[314]Kubary,Ethn. Beitr. Karolinen-Archipel., p. 1, Leyden, 1889–95.

[315]Balfour,Journ. Anthro. Inst., vol. xix., 1889, p. 54.

[316]Nillsson,Ureinwohner Skand. Nordens, p. 37, Hamburg, 1866, i. Nachtr.

[317]Cooper,The Mishmee Hills, London, 1873.

[318]It is the English who have given to this porcelain the name ofcaurior cowry, which appears to be a corruption of the Sanscrit wordKaparda,Kapardika, whenceKavariin the Mahratta dialect; the Portuguese call itBoujiorBoughi; the inhabitants of the Maldives,boli; the Siamese,bios(which means shell in general in their language); the Arabs,waddaorvadaat.

[319]Martens, “Über verschiedene Verwendungen von Conchylien,”Zeit. für Ethn., Berlin, 1872, vol. iv., p. 65; Andree,Ethnol. Parall., p. 233; Stearns, “Ethno-conchology,”Report U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1887.

[320]In 1858, 2,938 piculs of cowry-shells (about 177 tons) were exported from Manilla, for the most part to England. In 1848,591⁄2tons of cowries were imported into Liverpool. At the time of the Dutch dominion of Ceylon, Amsterdam was the principal market of this trade; there were sold there in 1689 192,951 pounds (Dutch) of these shells; and in 1780 133,229 pounds (Johnston).

[321]O. Mason,loc. cit., p. 327, and “Prim. Travel and Transport,”Smithsonian Report U.S. Nat. Mus. for 1894, p. 239, Washington, 1896.

[322]D. Anuchin, “Sani, etc.” (The sledge, the canoe, and horses in funeral rites, in Russian),Drévnosti(Antiquities), vol. xiv., Moscow, 1890.

[323]See the Assyrian bas-reliefs, Maspero,Hist. anc. de l’Orient, vol. ii., p. 628, Paris, 1897; O. Mason,Origins of Invention, p. 334; and Moser,A travers l’Asie Centrale, p. 220, Paris, 1885.

[324]See for the history of classifications, Topinard,L’Anthr. gén., pp. 28–107, 264–349; Giglioli,Viaggio ... della Magenta, p. xxvii., Milan, 1875; and Keane,Ethnology, p. 162, Cambridge, 1896.

[325]Principal Races.Secondary Races.(1) Caucasian.(1) Caucasian, (2) Alleghanian (Red Indian).(2) Mongolian.(3) Hyperborean (Lapps), (4) Malay, (5) American(except the Red Indian), (6) Mongolian, (7) Paraborean(Eskimo), (8) Australian.(3) Ethiopian.(9) Kafir, (10) Ethiopian, (11) Negro, (12) Melanesian.(4) Hottentot.(13) Hottentot.—Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, “Classif. Anthropologique,”Mem. Soc. Anthr. Paris, vol. i., p. 125, 1861.

[325]

—Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, “Classif. Anthropologique,”Mem. Soc. Anthr. Paris, vol. i., p. 125, 1861.

[326]Principal Races.Secondary Races or “Modifications.”(1) Negroid.(1) Bushmen, (2) Negro, (3) Papuan.(2) Australoid.(4) Australians, (5) Black race of Deccan(Dravidians),(6) Ethiopian (Hamite).(3) Mongoloid.(7) Mongol, (8) Polynesian, (9) American,(10) Eskimo, (11) Malay.(4) Xanthochroid.(12) Xanthochroid of Northern Europe.(5) Melanochroid.(13) Melanochroid of Southern Europe, (14) Melanochroidof Asia (Arabs, Afghans, Hindus, etc.).—T. Huxley, “Geogr. Distrib. of Mankind,”Journ. Ethnol. Soc. London, N.S., vol. ii., p. 404, map, 1870. The classification of Flower (Jl. Anthro. Inst., vol. xiv., 1885, p. 378) differs from that of Huxley in a few details only. This eminent anatomist grouped his eleven races and three sub-races under three “types”—Negro, Mongolian, and Caucasian.

[326]

—T. Huxley, “Geogr. Distrib. of Mankind,”Journ. Ethnol. Soc. London, N.S., vol. ii., p. 404, map, 1870. The classification of Flower (Jl. Anthro. Inst., vol. xiv., 1885, p. 378) differs from that of Huxley in a few details only. This eminent anatomist grouped his eleven races and three sub-races under three “types”—Negro, Mongolian, and Caucasian.

[327]In the first edition of his classification (Rev. d’Anthr., 2nd series, vol. i., p. 509, Paris, 1878), Topinard admits sixteen races in three groups:—(a)Straight-haired Races.—Eskimo, Red Indians, Mexico-Peruvians, Guarani-Caribs, Mongols.(b)Wavy or Frizzy-haired Races.—Fair-haired people of Europe (Xanthochroids of Huxley), dark-haired people of Europe and Semites (Melanochroids of Huxley), Australians and Indo-Abyssinians (Australoids of Huxley), Fulbé, Finns, Celto-Slavs, Turanians.(c)Woolly-haired Races.—Bushmen, Papuans, Kafirs, Negritoes.In the second edition, dating from 1885 (Elém. Anthr. gén., p. 502), we find nineteen races grouped under three heads:—(a)White Leptorhine Races.—Anglo-Scandinavians, Finns (first type, Western), Mediterraneans, Semito-Egyptians, Lapono-Ligurians, Celto-Slavs.(b)Yellow Mesorhine Races.—Eskimo, Tehuelches, Polynesians, Red Indians, yellow peoples of Asia (including Finns of the second type), Guaranis (or South Americans, except the Tehuelches), Peruvians.(c)Black Platyrhine Races.—Australians, Bushmen, Melanesians, Negroes, Tasmanians, Negritoes.

[327]In the first edition of his classification (Rev. d’Anthr., 2nd series, vol. i., p. 509, Paris, 1878), Topinard admits sixteen races in three groups:—

(a)Straight-haired Races.—Eskimo, Red Indians, Mexico-Peruvians, Guarani-Caribs, Mongols.

(b)Wavy or Frizzy-haired Races.—Fair-haired people of Europe (Xanthochroids of Huxley), dark-haired people of Europe and Semites (Melanochroids of Huxley), Australians and Indo-Abyssinians (Australoids of Huxley), Fulbé, Finns, Celto-Slavs, Turanians.

(c)Woolly-haired Races.—Bushmen, Papuans, Kafirs, Negritoes.

In the second edition, dating from 1885 (Elém. Anthr. gén., p. 502), we find nineteen races grouped under three heads:—

(a)White Leptorhine Races.—Anglo-Scandinavians, Finns (first type, Western), Mediterraneans, Semito-Egyptians, Lapono-Ligurians, Celto-Slavs.

(b)Yellow Mesorhine Races.—Eskimo, Tehuelches, Polynesians, Red Indians, yellow peoples of Asia (including Finns of the second type), Guaranis (or South Americans, except the Tehuelches), Peruvians.

(c)Black Platyrhine Races.—Australians, Bushmen, Melanesians, Negroes, Tasmanians, Negritoes.

Back to Index Next