We are further justified in presenting this subject to our readers, from the conviction that the great questions it involves are still only partially appreciated by those familiar with other branches of science. The history of Man, as a denizen of the earth, has indeed been conceived and pursued in many different ways, according to the objects, genius, or opportunity of those engaged in the study; but these portraitures which have severally presented him as

The glory, jest, and riddle of the world,

are partial and subordinate, and in nowise fulfil the purport of the larger title before us. The philosopher, living in the comparative seclusion of one community, may indeed, like Blumenbach and Prichard, construct a science from the labours of those cosmopolite travellers who have studied mankind on a bold and broad scale, under every diversity of region and race. But, generally speaking, the tendency of common life and habitual pursuits in the most civilized communities is to narrow, by division and refinement, all great views of the human race. The social pictures of man, found in poetry, history, essay, or romance, will explain our meaning. They are for the most part individualities of character or custom, which tend rather to curtail than enlarge the outline of inquiry, and in truth have little relation to the Natural History of Man as a part of creation at large. Even the moral and religious feelings are concerned in giving their tone and temper to such investigations, differently defining the objects and pursuing them by separate routes. And further, these objects are in themselves so numerous, and their natural aspects of such endless variety, that we can scarcely wonder at the vague understanding of the questions which lie at the bottom of the whole -questions well worthy, nevertheless, of all the learning and ingenuity given to their solution.

Whatever may be the causes, certain it is that the physical history of man has only recently taken its place as a definite branch of science. The ancient philosophers dealt with it loosely, imperfectly, and erroneously. Their limited knowledge of the surface of the earth, their entire ignorance of whole existing races of mankind-the prejudices of their mythology—and their general want of appreciation of scientific evidence, the preference of the δοξα to the επιστημη-these difficulties which, in

of great simplicity, zealous in the pursuit of everything true and useful in science. His death may well be termed premature, inasmuch as the peculiar subject of his successful research was before him to the last. We are indebted to Dr. Symonds of Bristol for a very interesting memoir on his life and writings, and find every cause to wish it had extended to greater length. The events indeed are few, but it is always agreeable and useful to trace the workings of an ingenuous mind steadily devoted to one great object. B 2

their

their totality, even the genius of Aristotle could not surmount, may readily be admitted in explanation of the fact we have stated, Passing over the earlier but ambiguous researches of Camper, we may affirm that the true foundation of the science was that laid by Professor Blumenbach of Göttingen, whose long life of honourable labour closed not many years ago. His celebrated collection of skulls (which we have ourselves examined under his guidance) obtained by unwearied perseverance from every part of the globe, suggested new relations and more extended and exact inquiries in prosecution of one branch of the subject. The researches and writings of Cuvier, Humboldt, Lawrence, Owen, Tiedeman, Rudolfi, and other physiologists, while differing in certain conclusions, have continually enlarged the scope of the science and concentrated the results obtained by travellers and naturalists -thus augmenting the means upon which the removal of these differences and the certainty of all conclusions must eventually depend. Philology, meanwhile, has come largely in aid of the inquiry, and the study and classification of languages, indicated more remotely by Scaliger, Bacon, and Leibnitz, has grown into a vast body of authentic knowledge, ministering through new and unexpected relations to the history of the races and communities of mankind. The names of Adelung, Schlegel, Wilhelm von Humboldt, Remusat, Grimm, Klaproth, Rask, Bunsen, Meyer, &c. indicate the more conspicuous of those who have advanced this science abroad. In our own country we may cite Harris, Horne Tooke, Sir W. Jones, Wilkins, Marsden, Young, Prichard, Latham, &c., as worthy associates in the same learned career.

The physical history of mankind, derived from these sources, has now assumed its place as one of the most eminent branches of natural science-assuredly one of the most interesting, in expounding to man his natural relations to the rest of creation on the globe, and those progressive causes of change which have unceasingly modified his condition here, and may continue to affect and alter it in ages yet to come.

For what are we fitly to understand as comprised in the titles of the works before us? In stating it to be the natural history of man, as a branch of that larger science which includes the physical history of all organized life on the globe, we give but a meagre conception of the subject. Vegetable life, individually fixed to one spot-generically distributed into different regions so as to form an especial science of botanical geography-limited by climate, soil, and other circumstances, though capable of vast changes by culture-all this, while furnishing much of curious illustration and analogy, can only slightly represent to us what pertains to the physical history of the human race. When we

rise in the scale of creation through the innumerable forms and gradations of animal life, and reach those wonderful instincts, and yet higher functions of intelligence and feeling in certain animals, which Aristotle well calls μιμήματα της ανθρωπινης Cans, though finding some of the analogies to approach more closely, still are we far below the level of those great questions which regard the human species-the origin, dispersion, and mutual relation of the various races of mankind. To mere physical evidence are here added other and higher methods of proof, connected with the exercise of those mental faculties which mark man as the head of the animal creation. The peculiarity, the grandeur, and, we may add, the difficulty of the theme, depend mainly on his condition as an intellectual being, whereby his whole existence on earth is defined, and the relations of races and communities of men created and maintained.

And here we touch upon the question which may be said to govern the whole subject, and which we cannot better or more briefly define than in Dr. Prichard's own words :

'It will be the principal object of the following work to collect data for elucidating the inquiry, whether all the races of men scattered over the surface of the earth, distinguished as they are from each other in structure of body, in features, and in colour, and differing in languages and manners, are the offspring of a single stock, or have descended respectively from several original families? This problem is so extensive in its bearings, and in many particulars so intricate and complex, that I can scarcely hope to discover evidence conclusive in respect to every part of the investigation. I shall endeavour to collect and throw upon it all the light that can be obtained from different sources.'

We have said that this question, as to the unity and single origin of the human race, governs the whole subject; and it does so in the obvious sense, that if the fact be admitted or proved (as far as proof is attainable), certain other collateral questions at once disappear. If, for instance, it can be rendered certain to our belief that all mankind, throughout all ages of human existence on the globe-in all their innumerable varieties of form, colour, customs, and language-have been derived from one single pair, nothing remains but to investigate the causes, physical and moral, which have produced from this unity of origin the wonderful diversities everywhere visible. A subject wide enough in truth to satisfy the most eager speculator! yet well defined in its limits, and even in many of the lines through which research must be pursued. But this simpler form of the question is not permitted to us: the point is one upon which naturalists of eminence have held very different opinions. It has been con

tended

tended not only that there is no proof of the derivation of mankind from a single pair, but that the probability is against it. Some have adventured to suppose an absolute difference of species in the beings thus placed by the Creator on the earth. Many have adopted the idea of detached acts of creation, through which certain of the more prominent races had their separate origin in different localities-interblending afterwards, so as to give rise to those subordinate varieties which we see so numerously around us. Others again, putting aside the notion of the immutability of species, have boldly hazarded the belief that inferior animal organizations, either fortuitously or by necessities or latent laws of nature, may have risen into the human form and this under conditions so far unlike, as to give origin to the more remarkable diversities which have perplexed our ideas of unity, and puzzled both philosopher and physiologist to explain.

ques

Before going further, we may briefly advert to a point which must already have occurred to every reader. Has not this tion been long ago settled on the authority of Scripture so as to preclude all further discussion upon it? Are we entitled to go beyond, and to risk any portion of our faith, upon statements or inductions derived from other sources, if contradicting the interpretations commonly given to this higher authority?

The question is one not new to modern science. In reply to it, and to vindicate that right of reason and inquiry which Man has received as one of the greatest gifts from his Creator, it might be enough for us to cite passages from the writings of several distinguished geologists, who have weighed this point with all the seriousness and candour befitting their reputation as men of piety and truth. The difference of the subject does in no wise affect the argument, which applies alike and with equal force to both cases. Prichard himself, in his Introduction, has clearly and forcibly We might further cite what Dr. written in vindication of the research he is about to commence. Take indeed what course we may, these questions, from their very nature, must needs infix themselves deeply in the minds of thinking men, and become in one way or other the matter of earnest inquiry. That the cause of truth will assuredly gain in the end, we can affirm with the greater satisfaction in this case, because it is our conviction, in common with Dr. Prichard, that the conclusions of reason and science, unaided by Scripture, concur mainly with those derived from the latter source. think there are sufficient grounds, without reference to the sacred We writings, for arriving at the conclusion that all races and diversities of mankind are really derived from a single pair; placed on the earth

earth for the peopling of its surface, both in the times before us, and during the ages which it may please the Creator yet to assign to the present order of existence here. The arguments for such belief we shall now state; and they will be found to comprise, directly or indirectly, every part of this great subject.

In doing this we shall not bind ourselves closely to Dr. Prichard's arrangement, but seek in the shorter space at our disposal to put forward those points which bear most cogently on the conclusion just denoted. On some of these points we think that neither he, nor other writers, have been explicit enough, or given them their full weight in the argument. We shall endeavour to place the evidence in as clear a form as possible, and to aid those unacquainted with the subject in comprehending its relative value and effect.

What then are the sources of knowledge, what the methods of research, through which to arrive at, or approximate to, the solution of this inquiry? They may best, we believe, be classed under three heads:-First, the Physiological, including all that relates to the physical conformation of Man-his mental endowments the question of the unity or plurality of species-and the laws which license or limit the deviations from a common standard. Secondly, the Philological, including all that relates to human languages-their connexions, diversities, the theory of the changes they undergo, and the history of such actual changes, as far as we can follow it. Thirdly, the Historical-taking the term in its largest sense, as including all written history, inscriptions, traditions, mythology, and even the more common usages which designate and distinguish the different communities of mankind.

This too seems the natural course and order of the inquiry. Man is first to be considered as a part of the animal creation at large, and under the many points of close and unalterable likeness to other forms of animal life, in all that relates to his procreation, nutriment, growth, decay, and death, as well as in regard to the modifications of which the species is susceptible and the diversities it actually exhibits. Various instincts-belonging especially to the early stage of life, before his higher faculties have risen into action-further attest this great natural relation, which human pride can neither deny nor discard. But beyond and above this comes in the peculiar condition of Man as an intellectual being, richly provided by his Maker with those endowments which, in their highest elevation from nature or culture, have bequeathed to the admiration of all ages names made immortal by their genius and attainments-Homer, Aristotle, Dante, Bacon, Shakspeare, Milton, Newton, Leibnitz, Pascal, Laplace, and others which crowd on the memory-and gifted yet further