The History of Creation Volume II Part 17

It is just the position of this central spinal rod, or axial skeleton, between the dorsal marrow on the dorsal side, and the intestinal ca.n.a.l on the ventral side, which is most characteristic of all Vertebrate animals, including man, but also of the larvae of the Ascidia. The form value of this stage nearly corresponds with that which the larvae of the simple Sea-squirts possess at the time when they show the beginning of the dorsal marrow and spinal rod. (Plate XII. Fig. _A 5_: compare the explanation of these figures in the Appendix.)

SECOND HALF OF THE SERIES OF HUMAN ANCESTORS. VERTEBRATE ANIMAL ANCESTORS OF MAN (Vertebrata).

NINTH STAGE: +Skull-less Animals (Acrania)+.

The series of human ancestors, which in accordance with their whole organisation we have to consider as Vertebrate animals, begins with the Skull-less animals, or Acrania, of whose nature the still living Lancelet (Amphioxus lanceolatus, Plate XII. _B_, XIII. _B_) gives us a faint idea. Since this little animal in its earliest embryonal state entirely agrees with the Ascidia, and in its further development shows itself to be a true Vertebrate animal, it forms a direct transition from the Vertebrata to the Invertebrata. Even if the human ancestors of the ninth stage in many respects differed from the Amphioxus-the last surviving representative of the Skull-less animals-yet they must have resembled it in its most essential characteristics, in the absence of head, skull, and brain. Skull-less animals of such structure-out of which animals with skulls developed at a later period-lived during the primordial period, and originated out of the Himatega of the eighth stage by the formation of the metamera, or body segments, as also by the further differentiation of all organs, especially the more perfect development of the dorsal nerve-marrow and the spinal rod lying below it. Probably the separation of the two s.e.xes (gonochorism) also began at this stage, whereas all the previously mentioned invertebrate ancestors (apart from the 3-4 first neutral stages) exhibited the condition of hermaphrodites (hermaphroditism). (Compare vol. i. p. 196.) The _certain proof_ of the former existence of these skull-less and brainless ancestors of man, is furnished by the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of the Amphioxus and of the Craniota.

TENTH STAGE: +Single-nostriled Animals (Monorrhina)+.

Out of the Skull-less ancestors of man there arose in the first place animals with skulls, or Craniota, of the most imperfect nature. The lowest stage of all still living Craniota is occupied by the cla.s.s of round-mouthed animals, or Cyclostoma, namely, the Hag (Myxinoidea) and Lampreys (Petromyzontia). From the internal organization of these single-nostriled animals, or Monorrhina, we can form an approximate idea of the nature of the human ancestors of the tenth stage. In the former, as also in the latter, skull and brain must have been of the simplest form, and many important organs, as for example, the swimming bladder, the sympathetic nerve, the spleen, the jaw skeleton, and both pairs of legs, may probably as yet not have existed. However, the pouch gills and the round sucking mouth of the Cyclostoma must probably be looked upon as purely adaptive characteristics, which did not exist in the corresponding stage of ancestors. The single-nostriled animals originated during the primordial period out of the skull-less animals by the anterior end of the dorsal marrow developing into the brain, and the anterior end of the dorsal chord into the skull. The _certain proof_ that such single-nostriled and jawless ancestors of man did exist, is found in the "comparative anatomy of the Myxinoidea."

ELEVENTH STAGE: +Primaeval Fish (Selachii.)+.

Of all known Vertebrate animals, the ancestors of the Primaeval Fish probably showed most resemblance to the still living Sharks (Squalacei).

They _originated_ out of the single-nostriled animals by the division of the single nostril into two lateral halves, by the formation of a sympathetic nervous system, a jaw skeleton, a swimming bladder, and two pairs of legs (breast fins or fore-legs, and ventral fins or hind-legs).

The internal organisation of this stage may probably, upon the whole, have corresponded to the lowest species of Sharks known to us; the swimming bladder was however more strongly developed; in the case of the latter it exists only as a rudimentary organ. They _lived_ as early as the Silurian period, as is proved by the fossil remains of sharks (teeth and fin spines) from the Silurian strata. A _certain proof_ that the Silurian ancestors of man and of all the other double-nostriled animals were nearest akin to the Selachii, is furnished by the comparative anatomy of the latter; it shows that the relations of organisation in all Amphirrhina can be derived from those of the Selachii.

TWELFTH STAGE: +Mud Fish (Dipneusta)+.

Our twelfth ancestral stage is formed by Vertebrate animals which probably possessed a remote resemblance to the still living Salamander fish (Ceratodus, Protopterus, Lepidosiren, p. 212). They _originated_ out of the Primaeval fish (probably at the beginning of the palaeolithic, or primary period) by adaptation to life on land, and by the transformation of the swimming bladder into an air-breathing lung, and of the nasal cavity (which now opened into the cavity of the mouth) into air pa.s.sages. The series of the ancestors of man which breathed air through lungs began at this stage. Their organisation may probably in many respects have agreed with that of the still living Ceratodus and Protopterus, but at the same time may have been very different. They probably lived at the beginning of the Devonian period. Their existence is _proved_ by comparative anatomy, which shows the Dipneusta to be an intermediate stage between the Selachii and Amphibia.

THIRTEENTH STAGE: +Gilled Amphibians (Sozobranchia)+.

Out of those Mud Fish, which we considered the primary forms of all the Vertebrata which breathe through lungs, there developed the cla.s.s of Amphibia as the main line (pp. 205, 216). Here began the five-toed formation of the foot (the Pentadactyla), which was thence transmitted to the higher Vertebrata, and finally also to Man. The gilled Amphibians must be looked upon as our most ancient ancestors of the cla.s.s of Amphibia; besides possessing lungs they retained throughout life regular gills, like the still living Proteus and Axolotl (p. 218). They _originated_ out of the Dipneusta by the transformation of the paddling fins into five-toed legs, and also by the more perfect differentiation of various organs, especially of the vertebral column. In any case they existed about the middle of the palaeolithic, or primary period, possibly even before the Coal period; for fossil Amphibia are found in coal. The _proof_ that similar gilled Amphibians were our direct ancestors, is given by the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of Amphibia and Mammals.

FOURTEENTH STAGE: +Tailed Amphibians (Sozura)+.

Our amphibious ancestors which retained their gills throughout life, were replaced at a later period by other Amphibia, which, by metamorphosis, lost the gills which they had possessed in early life, but retained the tail, as in the case of the salamanders and newts of the present day. (Compare p. 218.) They _originated_ out of the gilled Amphibians by accustoming themselves in early life to breathe only through gills, and later in life only through lungs. They probably existed even in the second half of the primary, namely, during the Permian period, but possibly even during the Coal period. The _proof_ of their existence lies in the fact that tailed Amphibians form a necessary intermediate link between the preceding and succeeding stages.

FIFTEENTH STAGE: +Primaeval Amniota (Protamnia)+.

The name Protamnion we have given to the primary form of the three higher cla.s.ses of Vertebrate animals, out of which the Proreptilia and the Promammalia developed as two diverging branches (p. 222). It _originated_ out of unknown tailed Amphibia by the complete loss of the gills, by the formation of the amnion, of the cochlea, and of the round window in the auditory organ, and of the organs of tears. It probably originated in the beginning of the mesolithic or secondary period, perhaps even towards the end of the primary, in the Permian period. The _certain proof_ that it once existed lies in the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of the Amniota; for all Reptiles, Birds, and Mammals, including Man, agree in so many important characteristics that they must, with full a.s.surance, be admitted to be the descendants of a single common primary form, namely, of the Protamnion.

SIXTEENTH STAGE: +Primary Mammals (Promammalia)+.

We now find ourselves more at home with our ancestors. From the sixteenth up to the twenty-second stage they all belong to the large and well known cla.s.s of Mammals, the confines of which we ourselves have as yet not transgressed. The common, long since extinct and unknown primary forms of all Mammalia, which we have named Promammalia, were at all events, of all still living animals, of the cla.s.s most closely related to the Beaked animals, or Ornithostoma (Ornithorhynchus, Echidna, p.

233). They differed from the latter, however, by the teeth present in their jaws. The formation of the beak in the Beaked animals of the present day must be looked upon as an adaptive characteristic which developed at a later period. The Promammalia arose out of the Protamnia (probably only at the beginning of the secondary period, namely, in the Trias) by various advances in their internal organisation, as also by the transformation of the epidermal scales into hairs, and by the formation of a mammary gland which furnished milk for the nourishment of the young ones. The _certain proof_ that the Promammalia-inasmuch as they are the common primary forms of all Mammals-also belong to our ancestors, lies in the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of Mammalia and Man.

SEVENTEENTH STAGE: +Pouched Animals (Marsupialia)+.

The three sub-cla.s.ses of Mammalia-as we have already seen-stand in such a relation to one another that the Marsupials, both as regards their anatomy and their ontogeny and phylogeny, form the direct transition from the Monotrema to Placental animals (p. 247). Consequently, human ancestors must also have existed among Marsupials. They _originated_ out of the Monotrema-which include the primary Mammalia, or Promammalia-by the division of the cloaca into the r.e.c.t.u.m and the urogenital sinus, by the formation of a nipple on the mammary gland, and by the partial suppression of the clavicles. The oldest Marsupials at all events existed as early as the Jura period (perhaps even in the Trias); during the Chalk period they pa.s.sed through a series of stages preparing the way for the origin of Placentalia. The certain proof of our derivation from Marsupials-nearly akin to the still living opossum and kangaroo in their essential inner structure-is furnished by the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of Mammalia.

EIGHTEENTH STAGE: +Semi-apes (Prosimiae)+.

The small group of Semi-apes, as we have already seen, is one of the most important and most interesting orders of Mammalia. It contains the direct primary forms of Genuine Apes, and thus also of Man. Our Semi-ape ancestors probably possessed only a very faint external resemblance to the still living, short-footed Semi-apes (Brachytarsi), especially the Maki, Indri, and Lori (p. 256). They _originated_ (probably at the beginning of the Cenolithic, or Tertiary period) out of Marsupials of Rat-like appearance by the formation of a placenta, the loss of the marsupium and the marsupial bones, and by the higher development of the commissures of the brain. The _certain proof_ that Genuine Apes, and hence also our own race, are the direct descendants of Semi-apes, is to be found in the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of Placental animals.

NINETEENTH STAGE: +Tailed Apes (Menocerca)+.

Of the two cla.s.ses of Genuine Apes which developed out of the Semi-apes, it is only the narrow-nosed, or Catarrhini, which are closely related by blood to Man. Our older ancestors from this group probably resembled the still living Nose-apes and Holy-apes (Semnopithecus), which possess jaws and narrow noses like Man, but have a long tail, and their bodies densely covered with hair (p. 271). The Tailed Apes with narrow noses (Catarrhini Menocerci) _originated_ out of Semi-apes by the transformation of the jaw, and by the claws on their toes becoming changed into nails; this probably took place as early as the older Tertiary period. The _certain proof_ of our derivation from Tailed Catarrhini is to be found in the comparative anatomy and the ontogeny of Apes and of Man.

TWENTIETH STAGE: +Man-like Apes (Anthropoides)+.

Of all still living Apes the large tail-less, narrow-nosed Apes, namely, the Orang and Gibbon in Asia, the Gorilla and Chimpanzee in Africa, are most nearly akin to Man. It is probable that these Man-like Apes, or Anthropoides, originated during the Mid-tertiary period, namely, in the Miocene period. They developed out of the Tailed Catarrhini of the preceding stage-with which they essentially agree-by the loss of the tail, the partial loss of the hairy covering and by the excessive development of that portion of the brain just above the facial portion of the skull. There do not exist direct human ancestors among the Anthropoides of the present day, but they certainly existed among the unknown extinct Human Apes of the Miocene period. The _certain proof_ of their former existence is furnished by the comparative anatomy of Man-like Apes and of Man.

TWENTY-FIRST STAGE: +Ape-like Men (Pithecanthropi)+.

Although the preceding ancestral stage is already so nearly akin to genuine Men that we scarcely require to a.s.sume an intermediate connecting stage, still we can look upon the speechless Primaeval Men (Alali) as this intermediate link. These Ape-like men, or Pithecanthropi, very probably existed towards the end of the Tertiary period. They originated out of the Man-like Apes, or Anthropoides, by becoming completely habituated to an upright walk, and by the corresponding stronger differentiation of both pairs of legs. The fore hand of the Anthropoides became the human hand, their hinder hand became a foot for walking. Although these Ape-like Men must not merely by the external formation of their bodies, but also by their internal mental development, have been much more akin to real Men than the Man-like Apes could have been, yet they did not possess the real and chief characteristic of man, namely, the articulate human language of words, the corresponding development of a higher consciousness, and the formation of ideas. The _certain proof_ that such Primaeval Men without the power of speech, or Ape-like Men, must have preceded men possessing speech, is the result arrived at by an inquiring mind from comparative philology (from the "comparative anatomy" of language), and especially from the history of the development of language in every child ("glottal ontogenesis") as well as in every nation ("glottal phylogenesis").

TWENTY-SECOND STAGE: +Men (Homines)+.

Genuine Men _developed_ out of the Ape-like Men of the preceding stage by the gradual development of the animal language of sounds into a connected or articulate language, of words. The development of this function, of course, went hand in hand with the development of its organs, namely, the higher differentiation of the larynx and the brain.

The transition from speechless Ape-like Men to Genuine or Talking Men probably took place at the beginning of the Quaternary period, namely, in the Diluvial period, but possibly even at an earlier date, in the more recent Tertiary. As, according to the unanimous opinion of most eminent philologists, all human languages are not derived from a common primaeval language, we must a.s.sume a polyphyletic origin of language, and in accordance with this a polyphyletic transition from speechless Ape-like Men to Genuine Men.

ANCESTRAL SERIES OF THE HUMAN PEDIGREE.

M N = Boundary between the Invertebrate and Vertebrate Ancestors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _Epochs of the_ | _Geological Periods_ | _Animal_ | _Nearest Living_ _Organic_ | _of the_ | _Ancestral Stages_ | _Relatives of the_ _History of the_| _Organic History_ | _of_ | _Ancestral Stages._ _Earth._ | _of the Earth._ | _Man._ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- { { 1. Monera { _Protogenes_ { { (_Monera_) { _Protamba_ { { { { 2. Single-celled { Simple Ambae { { Primaeval animals { (_Autombae_) { { { { 3. Many-celled { Communities of { { Primaeval animals { Ambae { { { (_Synambae_) { { { { 4. Ciliated planulae { Planula larvae { { (_Planaeada_) { I. { { ARCHILITHIC { 1. Laurentian Period { 5. Primaeval Intestinal { Gastrula larvae OR { { animals (_Gastraeada_) { { 2. Cambrian Period { PRIMORDIAL { { 6. Gliding Worms { _Rhabdocla_ EPOCH { 3. Silurian Period { (_Turbellaria_) { _Dendrocla_ { { { { 7. Soft-worms { ?Between the Sea-squirts { { (_Scolecida_) { and Gliding worms { { { { 8. Sack worms { Sea-squirts { { (_Himatega_) { (_Ascidiae_) { { M.................................................N { { 9. Skull-less { Lancelets { { (_Acrania_) { (_Amphioxi_) { { { { 10. Single-nostriled { Lampreys { { (_Monorrhina_) { (_Petromyzonta_) { (Compare p. 22, and { { Plate XIV. and its { 11. Primaeval fish { Sharks { explanation.) { (_Selachii_) { (_Squalacei_) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- { 4. Devonian Period { 12. Salamander fish { Mud fish II. { { (_Dipneusta_) { (_Protopteri_) PALaeOLITHIC { 5. Coal Period { OR { { 13. Gilled Amphibia { (_Proteus_) { 6. Permian Period { (_Sozobranchia_) { Axolotl (_Siredon_) PRIMARY { { EPOCH { { 14. Tailed Amphibia { Water-newts { { (_Sozura_) { (_Tritons_) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- { { 15. Primaeval Amniota { ?Between the Tailed-Amphibia III. { { (_Protamnia_) { and Primary MESOLITHIC { 7. Trias Period { { mammals OR { { { 8. Jura Period { 16. Primary Mammals { Beaked animals SECONDARY { { (_Promammalia_) { (_Monotrema_) EPOCH { 9. Chalk Period { { { 17. Pouched animals { Pouched rats { { (_Marsupialia_) { (_Didelphys_) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- { { 18. Semi-apes { Lori (_Stenops_) { { (_Prosimiae_) { Maki (_Lemur_) { { IV. { { 19. Tailed Narrow-nosed { Nose apes CENOLITHIC { 10. Eocene Period { Apes { Holy apes OR { { { 11. Miocene Period { 20. Men-like Apes or { Gorilla, Chimpanzee, TERTIARY { { Tail-less Narrow-nosed { Orang, EPOCH { 12. Pliocene Period { Apes { Gibbon { { { { 21. Speechless Men or { Deaf and Dumb, { { Ape-like Men { Cretins or { { { Microcephali --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. { { { QUATERNARY { 13. Diluvial Period { 22. Talking Men { Australians and EPOCH { 14. Alluvial Period { { Papuans

CHAPTER XXIII.

MIGRATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MANKIND. HUMAN SPECIES AND HUMAN RACES.

Age of the Human Race.-Causes of its Origin.-The Origin of Human Language.-Monophyletic or Single, Polyphyletic or Multiple Origin of the Human Race.-Derivation of Man from many Pairs.-Cla.s.sification of the Human Races.-System of Twelve Species of Men.-Woolly-haired Men, or Ulotrichis.-Bushy-haired (Papuans, Hottentots).-Fleecy-haired (Caffres, Negroes).-Straight-haired men, or Lissotrichi.-Stiff-haired (Australians, Malays, Mongols, Arctic, and American Tribes).-Curly-haired (Dravidas, Nubians, Midlanders).-Number of Population.-Primaeval Home of Man (South Asia, or Lemuria).-Nature of Primaeval Men.-Number of Primaeval Languages (Monoglottists and Polyglottists).-Divergence and Migration of the Human Race.-Geographical Distribution of the Human Species.

The rich treasure of knowledge we possess in the comparative anatomy and the history of the development of Vertebrate animals, enables us even now to establish the most important outlines of the human pedigree in the way we have done in the last chapter. One must, however, not expect to be able to survey satisfactorily in every detail the history or phylogeny of the human species which will henceforth form the basis of Anthropology, and of all other sciences. The complete development of this most important science-of which we can only lay the first foundation-must remain reserved for the more accurate and extensive investigations of a future time. This applies also to those more special questions of human phylogeny at which it is desirable before concluding to take a cursory glance, namely, the question of the time and place of the origin of the human race, as also of the different species and races into which it has differentiated.

In the first place, the period of the earth's history, within which the slow and gradual trans.m.u.tation of the most man-like apes into the most ape-like men took place, can of course not be determined by years, nor even by centuries. This much can, however, with full a.s.surance be maintained, for reasons given in the last chapter, that Man is derived from Placental animals. Now, as fossil remains of these Placentalia are found only in the tertiary rocks, the human race can at the earliest have developed only within the Tertiary period out of perfected man-like apes. What seems most probable is that this most important process in the history of terrestrial creation occurred towards the end of the Tertiary period, that is in the Pliocene, perhaps even in the Miocene period, but possibly also not until the beginning of the Diluvial period. At all events Man, as such, lived in central Europe as early as the Diluvial period, contemporaneously with many large, long since extinct mammals, especially with the diluvial elephant, or mammoth (Elephas primigenius), the woolly-haired rhinoceros (Rhinoceros tichorrhinus), the giant deer (Cervus euryceros), the cave bear (Ursus spelaeus), the cave hyaena (Hyaena spelaea), the cave lion (Felis spelaeus), etc. The results brought to light by recent geology and archaeology as to these fossil men and their animal contemporaries of the diluvial period, are of the greatest interest. But as a closer examination of them would occupy too much of my limited s.p.a.ce, I must confine myself here to setting forth their great general importance, and refer for particulars to the numerous writings which have recently been published on the Primaeval History of Man, more especially to the excellent works of Charles Lyell,(30) Carl Vogt,(27) Friedrich Rolle,(28) John Lubbock,(44) L. Buchner,(43) etc.