« AnkstesnisTęsti »
This circumstance however reminds us of another,that the learned Hungarians firmly believe their progenitors to have migrated from Circassia and the neighbouring regions. Indeed the last migration, that of the Cumanians, was so recent, and the declaration of the people themselves, that they derived their name from the river Kouma (on the northern side of Caucasus), so positive, as to seem more like testimony than mythical opinion: and the first Magyar immigrants of whom we know, the Iazygs, are called a branch of the wandering Sarmatians, while in the days of Herodotus the Sarmatians notoriously had their seat among the northern roots of the Caucasus. Now the women of Circassia and Georgia are celebrated for their beauty so indeed are the chiefs of Georgia; but Dr. Latham informs us that the common men are very coarsefeatured. This may perhaps be a point acquired by them, in common with the Hungarians, on the Caucasian district, a general beauty of the women, co-existing with a prevalent Tartar aspect in the men.
In passing, we spoke of the Iazygs as Magyars. It is a fact, that one branch of the true Magyars still style themselves Iazygs; and since they live (as nearly as can be made out) on the same area as the Iazyges in the days of Tacitus, it will need some very clear proof to make us doubt of their being the same people. Latham however follows his predecessors in inferring that they cannot have been Magyars, because they were a branch of the Sarmatians. But we think this unduly assumes that “Sarmatians” was a term designating a single race. As the Greeks said Scythians, so did the Latins Sarmatians, to denote all the roving tribes of the great country north of the Black Sea. When Tacitus, for instance, speaks in one place of the Iazyges, in another of the Rhoxolani, as Sarmatian nations, he shows his belief that both came from Sarmatia, but not that they were both of the same blood or language, about which he perhaps knew nothing.
It is amusing to see the Nemesis of Logic scourging the upholders of the Caucasian theory. The proud believers in the immaculate and inimitable European blood scorned the idea that the Ottoman Turks had become beautiful by the effect of fine climate and healthy habits, and insisted that it was from intermarriage with beautiful Caucasian
females. But lo! the greatest authorities we have,-Dr. Latham and Mr. Norris,-pronounce these Caucasians to be Mongolidae, more nearly akin to Chinese than to Europeans. Latham alleges, that all the error on the subject was produced by the skull of one Georgian female, which, happening to be the finest in Blumenbach's collection, seemed to that excellent investigator a sufficient reason for bestowing the epithet Caucasian on all wellskulled races. The next step was, to infer that all men with good skulls were of a single race, fitly called Caucasian and the last,-that these races had been diffused from the Caucasus as their centre !
The Armenians, according to Latham, are a sort of link or transitional race, which may ultimately perhaps explain the relations of Mongolidae and Iapetidae. The Albanians, whom Prichard unhesitatingly makes Indo-European, Latham to our surprise is disposed to connect with the old Iberians, as members of old Europe before the Iapetidae flooded it. If this view has much support, it may be hoped that the Albanian will help to understand the transition from the Iberian to the Iapetic tongues.
We hardly think that Latham is as conscious as he ought to be, of the lame conclusion in which his science for the present leaves us. It teaches that the great Iapetids who have filled Europe and affected the world far beyond all other parts of the human family, did not originate in Europe, but came from Asia: yet it scarcely allows to Asia any power of generating Iapetids. In Persia itself, Latham imagines, the race has died out! There is certainly something wrong here. It has been seen that Latham, with Prichard, believes in the power of climate and habits to change the type of human races:-we also believe it; under the condition of ample time. But if this be the correct view, then the Iapetid peculiarities are to be more anxiously referred to localities; and we are to believe that in long time Europeans would have become what they are, had Europe been peopled by Mongolians. In fact, we are not aware that the old Iberians, who are not Iapetids in language, were in talents or beauty surpassed by them. Persia also, in spite of its vast infusion of Tartar population, continues in all its warmer valleys to produce the same handsome type of men and
women as Persepolitan sculptures exhibit and as Xenophon praised.
In an article on Pickering in our February number, we expressed our dissent from the arbitrary (indeed false) assumption, that the unity of the human species means descent from a single pair. We are sorry to see Latham reproduce this among his apophthegms as a definition of species, justifying it on the ground that it "has the advantage of being founded upon a fact capable of being ascertained." Strange! when this is precisely what no one can ascertain;-that the Creator did not produce at once a thousand human pairs, for mutual defence and comfort, and to promote the development of mind, but left one to multiply under all risks. But we cannot admit that the unity of our species is a phrase which any one may define at pleasure. Does not every dog in the street know all other dogs to be of the same species with himself, and all men to be of the same species one with another? Does any dog who has lost his master ever hesitate what what sort of animals may, and what may not, furnish a new master for him? And shall it be pretended that man does not know man to be of the same species with himself by a direct perception? The popular heart here judges more certainly than scholastic intellect :
"As the clear sky seen in a waveless river,
As the green leaves above and grass below,
Thus in the single nature of mankind
Heart beats with heart, and mind responds to mind."
Of the condensed learning contained in the book before us, we have scarcely given the reader an idea; but we may add, the reasonings are almost entirely those of literature, not of physiology, and although it is a worthy addition to Prichard, it is essentially supplementary, and does not attempt to work out great principles from the foundation. Nor does he (as far as we see) attempt to grapple with the difficult inquiry concerning the order of migrations,
and the relation of the Sanscritical to the Egyptian and Assyrian populations which has of late received a new impulse. But the author honestly professes only his contribution (and it is a large one) to a large subject.
At the same time we sometimes wish that he would exhibit his arguments more fully. Once or twice he refers us to what he has written for the Philological Society of London; but the books of that Society are not to be bought, and a short paper might well be reprinted. When he argues that the Slavonic area in the east of Germany has not increased since the Christian era, we cannot understand, even from his paper in the Philological, what reason he has to reject the very distinct testimony of Velleius Paterculus and of Strabo, that under Maroboduus their contemporary the Marcomanni were masters and occupants of Bohemia. He seems to assume that this is a mistake; otherwise he could hardly urge the mere absence of records of the Tchech invasion as any proof that the Tchechs were in possession of Bohemia before the Christian era. Altogether, Dr. Latham is too concise and abrupt in his mode of arguing; so that he is apt rather to surprise and perplex than convince. But he is rich in suggestion, fresh and searching in his theories, eminently learned, and of untiring enthusiasm. With such abilities, the longer he lives and writes, the more he will overcome a certain over-dryness of style which rises out of his effort at scientific exactness.
ART. III.-AUGUST NEANDER.
Zum Gedächtniss August Neanders. Berlin, 1850. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Christliche Wissenschaft und Christliches Leben. Berlin, July 27, August 3, 1850.
BERLIN has been again excited by the spectacle of a public funeral. The last solemn procession which swept through her streets convoyed to the grave the bodies of those who fell in the riots subsequent to the Revolution of March, 1850. It was a procession sufficiently impressive to all who beheld it: stirring military music at a religious ceremony: long files of armed citizens following to the tomb citizens like themselves, who had courted and found a violent death by their own doors: faces where hatred and revenge had usurped the place of sorrow-all directed the observer's attention less to the present loss, than to the promises they contained of future storm. The contrast between this and the last public funeral was very marked. The Bible borne in solemn procession: the Academy of Arts and Letters represented by its officers: the University, by seventy professors and a long train of students: the City, by many of its most respectable citizens, seemed to testify to some great public loss. There was more respect, and less passion; more resignation, yet less hope. For to take the place of the citizens, who had fallen, as they thought, in defence of constitutional liberty, there were thousands ready to fill the Professor's chair of him whom Berlin had now lost, Europe could find not one. Professors mourned the death of the ever gentle colleague, whose learning cast a reflected lustre on their own body, and whose loving wisdom promoted their harmonious co-operation. Students deplored the venerated teacher, yet still more the kind and patient and sympathizing friend. Even the people felt they should miss from their streets his peculiar figure, whose charity and whose eccentricities were alike the subject of their daily gossip. The religious public of Germany felt that they had lost much in losing August Neander.
Another circumstance contributed to deepen the general CHRISTIAN TEACHER.-No. 50.