Types of mankind, or, Ethnological researches, based upon the ancient monuments, paintings, sculptures, and crania of races, and upon their natural, geographical, philological and Biblical history / illustrated by selections from the inedited papers of Samuel George Morton and by additional contributions from L. Agassiz, W. Usher, and H.S. Patterson ; by J.C. Nott and Geo. R. Gliddon.

  • Nott, Josiah C. (Josiah Clark), 1804-1873.
Date:
1860
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Types of mankind, or, Ethnological researches, based upon the ancient monuments, paintings, sculptures, and crania of races, and upon their natural, geographical, philological and Biblical history / illustrated by selections from the inedited papers of Samuel George Morton and by additional contributions from L. Agassiz, W. Usher, and H.S. Patterson ; by J.C. Nott and Geo. R. Gliddon. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    748/800 (page 692)
    The reveries of Fortia D’Urban (505) are now superannuated; the monstrous extrava- ganzas of a Paravey are preserved as ceaseless sources of merriment. (506) To refute either, seriously, would be sheer waste of time. The inundations of the river Hoang-ho, ovei'come by the engineer Yu, (507) lie parallel with the Egyptian Xllth dynasty; when, in the 23d century n. c., similar causes induced smaller constructions along the Nubian Nile : (508) and a reader of Pautliier will as soon associate those local dikings, buttresses, dams, and sluices, in China or Egypt, with Usher’s universal Flood, as by anybody else the Noachian deluge might be proposed in explanation of the levees along our Louisianian Mississippi. It would be an equal outlay of labor to discuss Hales’s views upon Chinese subjects; (509) after his Hebraical knowledge has been so repeatedly shaken throughout these pages: nor need we perplex the reader with other works whose authors, like our- selves, are not Sinologists; but who, in this respect unlike ourselves, do not seek for infor- mation at its only clear fountains. It will be now plain that “ Types of Mankind” recognizes for Chinese history none but Chinese historians. The chances of error lie uniquely in the channels through which its authors receive their accounts: and these, to our view, are completely guarded against when we accept Remusat and Pauthier, as, above all Europeans at this day, qualified to be their interpreters. Furthermore, every relevant passage from the Jesuit missionaries is embraced within Pauthier’s volumes. Under the caption of Mongolian Origin and ideographic writings, we have displayed the argumentative process through which it becomes certain, that Europe knew naught about China, nor China aught about Europe, until the end of the 1st century after C.: but modern acquaintance with Cathay dates from the Venetian Marco Polo, who resided in China about a. d. 1275; followed by the first Jesuit missionary, Father Michael Rogerius, who penetrated thither about a. d. 1581; and the second, Father Matthasus Riccius, in 1601. From that time, during more than a century, many accomplished Europeans l Soeietate Jesu flocked into the Celestial Empire; and to their vast labors are we indebted for complete reports upon China, derived by them from the highest scholastic and official sources of the realm — which narratives, now collated by Sinologists in Europe with the immense literary treasures accessible, in Chinese, to students, at Paris and Rome, prove to have been con- scientiously executed. No Europeans, before or since, have possessed such opportunities for acquiring thorough knowledge of everything Chinese as these lowly preachers of the Gospel. Indeed, the official report made, in 1692, by the “ President of the Supreme Court of Rites ” to the Emperor Khang-lii, and by him approved, alone suffices to show their powerful claims upon Mantchou-Tartar affections: — “We have found that these Europeans have traversed vast seas, and have come from the extremities of the earth. . . . They have at present the supervision of astronomy and of the board of mathematics. They have applied themselves with great pains to making war- like machines, and to casting cannon; of which use has been made in the last civil trou- bles [that is, the missionary ordnance had been found effective in quelling Chinese revolts against the Tartar dynasty]. When sent to Nip-chou with our ambassadors [the reverend Fathers Pereyra and Gerbillon, l Soc. Jes!/,] to treat about peace with the Muscovites, they caused those negotiations to succeed: in short, they have rendered great services to the [Mantchou] empire. . . . The doctrine which they teach is not bad, nor capable of seducing the [Chinese] people, or of causing any troubles. It is permitted to every body to go into the temples of the Lamas, of the Ilo-chang, of the Tao-ssi; and it is forbidden to go into the churches of these Europeans, who do nothing contrary to the laws: this does not seem reasonable.” (510) The emperor himself had been previously instructed by the scientific Father Yerbiest, “chief of the bureau of astronomers”; whose evangelical virtues comprised gnomonics, (505) Ilistoire AnM-diluvienne de la Chine. (506) Documents sur le Deluge de Not: l’nris, 1838. (507) Pauthier: Chine; pp. 12-4; and his ChouMng; pp. 49-56. (508) Lepsius: Nachricht; p. 11: — Briefe aus uEgypten; pp. 259, 200: —De Rouof: Phinom. Celestes; Rev. Archfiol., Feb. 1853. (509) Analysis: i. pp. 199-203. (610) Chine: pp. 435, 440, 445-449.