ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

By JAMES HUNT, Ph. D., F.S.A., F.R.S.L.,

FOREIGN ASSOCIATE OF THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF PARIS,

PRESIDENT.

GENTLEMEN,-I find myself placed in the honourable but somewhat difficult position of being the first speaker at a newly-formed scientific society. One thing, however, inspires me with confidence, the knowledge that my position has been caused more by my interest in the objects of the Society than by any special qualification for such a task. I shall therefore offer neither excuse nor apology for the matter I bring before you but will simply beg all who hear me, to grant me that patience and sympathy to which, as your President, I feel myself to some extent entitled. We are met, then, this evening, to inaugurate a society of students of a great branch of science which, up to this time, has found no fit place for discussion in any other institution.

:

Without dwelling on the etymology* of the title of our Society, it is still requisite that we should have some clear conception of the real import and breadth of the science which we unite specially to study and elucidate.

By some writers (especially by Dr. Latham), Anthropology has been so circumscribed in its meaning as to imply nothing more than the

"Anthropos, man, both as a generic term and of individuals, from Homer downwards; in plural of whole nations, mankind, the whole world. "Anthropos, Lat. homo, being man, as opposed to beast.

"Anthropologos, speaking or treating of man. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 4, 3, 31."-LIDDELL & SCOTT.

VOL. I.-NO. I.

B

relations of Man to the mammalia. If we were to accept this meaning of the term Anthropology, we should still have a vast and important field of investigation. I, for one, am prepared to accept this as our first great duty; and what a vast leap will science have made when those relations are fully established! I do not hesitate to assert that the question of the relation of Man to the mammalia lies at the very root, and must be the basis, of the development of the science of Man. What time has not been wasted in idle speculations, assumptions, and theories respecting the history of Man! What volumes have not been poured forth from the press on the origin of the human family! and yet at this moment Man's place in nature is a matter of grave dispute. What a strange position for science in the nineteenth century, to be found ignoring the connection of Man with the physical universe by which he is surrounded! And yet I think I may say with truth, that nearly all the writers respecting the problem of Man's past life have ignored his connection with the lower animals, simply because they have not been able to see the exact relation. But is it not perfectly useless to go on longer, thus looking at Man as a being disconnected from the whole chain of organic life? I will not waste time in showing that progressive knowledge of Man's history was impossible, so long as we were working in such a fundamentally erroneous system of investigation.

But I would not have it supposed that the science of Anthropology has any right to be confined to such limits. Anthropology is, on the contrary, the science of the whole nature of Man. With such a meaning it will include nearly the whole circle of sciences. Biology, anatomy, chemistry, natural philosophy, and physiology must all furnish the anthropologist with materials from which he may make his deductions. While Ethnology treats of the history or science of nations or races, we have to deal with the origin and development of humanity. So while Ethnography traces the position and arts of the different races of Man, it is our business to investigate the laws regulating the distribution of mankind'

These are more or less philosophic questions, and the public may be disposed to ask us, in this matter-of-fact age, what practical bearing our investigation can have on human welfare. To such an inquiry I would most unhesitatingly reply that, not only must we look to the anthropologist for all the reliable accounts we can ever have of Man's origin or early history, but that there is no science which is destined to confer more practical good on humanity at large than the one which specially investigates the laws regulating our physical nature. We

shall not stop when we have discussed the mode of man's origin or his development into what he now is, but we shall go on to inquire what are the laws by which he is at present regulated. Why, for instance, a race of mankind is arrested in development, or perishes, in one region and in another flourishes? What can be more practical than showing the causes which deteriorate or destroy the races of Europe, when removed to some other regions? How many thousands of our soldiers' lives would be saved annually if we studied temperament in the selection of men suitable for hot and those for cold climates? But I must not dwell on particulars. Suffice it to say that in whatever way we look on the study of the science of man we see good reason to believe that, as students of human nature, we cannot be dreaming theorists, but that every truth we discover must be for the benefit of humanity at large.

Whatever may be the conclusion to which our scientific inquiries may lead us, we should always remember, that by whatever means the Negro, for instance, acquired his present physical, mental, and moral character, whether he has risen from an ape or descended from a perfect man, we still know that the Races of Europe have now much in their mental and moral nature which the races of Africa have not got. We have hitherto devoted our attention almost exclusively to physical Anthropology, which Blumenbach first founded. We now require to investigate the mental and moral characteristics of mankind generally. The difference between the European and the African is not so great physically as it is mentally and morally. We must, therefore, not neglect the psychological investigation, but must pursue it hand in hand with our physical investigations. Perhaps the psychological distinctions proceed from physical causes alone, but we shall be more likely to get light thrown on this difficult question if we conduct both investigations at the same time.

A serious charge has been made against the American School of Anthropology, when it is affirmed that their interest in keeping up

In making this assertion I would not be understood as joining in the vulgar error that the Negro only differs from the European in the colour of his skin and peculiar hair. On the contrary, the physical differences are neither few nor insignificant. From the researches of that accomplished anthropologist, M. Paul Broca, we now know that the white substance of the brain of the Negro is of a different colour to that of a European, and that the pia mater contains brown spots, which are never found in the European. There are many other physical differences which our minute researches will bring to light. Whether all these physical differences, with the consequent mental and moral distinctions, combined with the asserted fact that nowhere does there exist a permanent hybrid Euro African race, are of sufficient value to justify us in classifying the Negro as a distinct species, is a point on which, for the present, I hazard no positive opinion.

slavery induced the scientific men of that country to advocate a distinct origin for the African race. For myself, I believe such a charge to be a gross calumny. If it could be demonstrated that the Negro was descended from the ape only a few generations ago, it would not at all alter the fact that at present he is a man, and has enough in common with ourselves to make us know that his parentage can be no excuse for using him cruelly. Or supposing that the Oran-ùtan is, as the Dyaks believe, a degenerated species of man, it is equally certain that he is not now a man, and has not the same claims on our sympathy as the most degraded savage.

I would therefore express a hope that the objects of this Society will never be prostituted to such an object as the support of the slave-trade, with all its abuses; but at the same time we must not shrink from the candid avowal of what we believe to be the real place in nature, or in society, of the African or any other race. It will be the duty of conscientious anatomists carefully to record all deviations from the human standard of organization and analogy with inferior types, which are frequently manifested in the negro race. These observations should be made solely as to the existence of the facts themselves, and without any reference to the theories that may be founded on them: Future generations will thank us more for the establishment of good reliable facts than for any hap-hazard speculations. At the same time I would not say a word against the generalizer. In a society like ours we want thinkers as well as observers. We should give every encouragement to the accurate reasoner, as it is to him we must look for the laws which can be deduced from our illustrations and accumulation of facts.

I should have liked to have given this evening a sketch of the present state of Anthropology; but I shall only be able just to touch on some points which may throw light on the best means for its future development. In the first place, I think it will be well if we can fully realize the exact position in which we now stand, as we shall then be better able to appreciate the amount of work that is before us. I beg, however, that no one will interpret my opinions to be in any way the opinion of the Society generally.

As far, then, as I am able to judge, the science of Anthropology is not only in its infancy, but as a science, it hardly yet has any existence. Why we should have good reliable facts and systematic collections of the remains of all animals except man, is a psychological phenomenon of great interest, but one which I must not stay to investigate: but there can be little or no doubt of the fact itself. Dr. Morton in

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »