The Scientific View of the Negro Before the Age of Political Correctness, Part 1

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information or DONATE HERE!

  • Christogenea Internet Radio
CHR20181228-NegroBeforePC-01.mp3 — Downloaded 22701 times


We are going to start something a little different this evening. Originally, I thought about presenting Clifton Emahiser’s brief paper, Diverse Seed Defiles Families. We may present that essay here in mid-January instead, since while I began preparing for that, a Christogenea Forum member had enlightened me to a book by Dr. John Van Evrie titled On Negroes and Negro Slavery, which was a defense of the institution of slavery in the South by a medical doctor from New York, of all places. Looking into this book, I saw that Wikipedia and other sources nearly ridicule Van Evrie, yet his book was actually cited in the bibliography of a famous Britannica article on Negros, which expressed many views shared by so-called “rednecks” and “racists” of today. It seems like a hundred years ago, our Christian Identity view of the Negro was actually quite popular among anthropologists, ethnologists and other academics.

This presentation is actually an extension of things that both Clifton Emahiser and myself had said as I presented his series of papers Identifying the Beast of the Field, where we cited similar sentiments as they were expressed by 19th century geologist Alexander Winchell, and elsewhere where I had mentioned men such as Alexander Winchell along with Professor Charles Carroll and his book The Negro, A Beast or In The Image of God? in my essay on The Role of Faith in a Successful Insurgency, Movement, or Community. So this is my endeavor to examine to a greater extent that phenomenon of such opinions held by educated men in the 19th century.

The Scientific View of the Negro Before the Age of Political Correctness, Part 1

This presentation, which may well become an occasional series, will endeavor to demonstrate that many mainstream writers and academics of the 19th and early 20th centuries, educated men who could not merely be dismissed as rednecks or racists, had correctly considered the Negro more as a beast than as a person, and certainly not as an entity which deserved a right to stand alongside White men as an equal peer in a civilized society. Of course, we certainly agree with that, not because we merely hate Negros, but because we have observed their behavior, we have judged their fruits, and we realize that they are far more an impediment to the function of society than they have ever been a benefit. They have been far more a destructive agent than they shall ever be a constructive asset. We believe that the evidence of the last hundred years demonstrates that as a race, Negros should have been left separated to dwell in their aboriginal state, and the only sound alternative was to leave them as non-citizens and slaves. Today, after nearly a century of “equality”, our cities are destroyed, our educational institutions have been debased with mediocrity, morals and ethics have become relative, and our arts are now mostly decadent exhibitions of savage concupiscence. We have become an English-speaking Africa decorated with European technology and a few still-white faces, white faces which are slowly coerced into awarding the Negro with ever-increasing benefits which stand as bribes so that they would maintain a facade of civility.

We can see the results of Negro emancipation and legislated political equality, having actually experienced the phenomenon. However one man who tried to warn the world of its consequences in advance was a medical doctor named John H. Van Evrie, who lived from 1814 to 1896. He was also the editor and proprietor of a newspaper called the Weekly Day Book, a Democratic newspaper, and a son of the founder of Rochester, a city on Lake Ontario in New York State. He also published several books on race relations and the character of the Negro, for which he used his own publishing company, Van Evrie, Horton & Company. His conclusions concerning the Negro led him to become a defender of the institution of slavery, and a defender of the cause of the Old South. He is slandered by mainstream sources today even in spite of the fact that many of his conclusions have been proven by the events of history subsequent to the War Between the States.

Here is the Preface to his book Negroes and Negro “Slavery:” The First an Inferior Race: The Latter its Normal Condition, which was published in its second edition in 1861.

Since the first edition of this work was issued, startling and deplorable events have occurred. The great “Anti-Slavery” delusion, that originated with European monarchists more than fifty years ago, has culminated in disunion and civil war, as its authors always predicted it would. A party strongly imbued with the false theories and absurd assumptions of British writers and abolition societies, is in possession of the Federal Government, which it stands pledged to use to reduce its assumptions to practice. It holds that the negro, except in color, is a man like themselves, and naturally entitled to the same liberty – that to deny him this liberty, is to enslave him – that, therefore, Southern society is wrong, and should be revolutionized, and it avows it to be its mission to accomplish this – to institute a policy that shall finally abolish or destroy the supremacy of the white man, and secure “impartial freedom” for negroes! [Of course, in our opinion to destroy the supremacy of the White man one must eliminate White men entirely, since he is naturally superior to the others by the nature of his biology.] To this the South replies, that this government was created for white men alone, and their posterity, as declared in the preamble to the Constitution – that the Supreme Court has recently declared the same great truth – that, seizing the government by a mere sectional vote, and placing it in distinct conflict with the social order of the South, with the avowed purpose of penning up its negro population, in order to bring about some day the extinction or overthrow of the existing condition, is, therefore, an overthrow of the Constitution – that the object avowed necessarily involves their future destruction, and to save themselves from the wild delusion and malignant fanaticism of the North, they are forced, in self-defense, to withdraw from the Union, hitherto, or until this hostile and dangerous party entered the field, so beneficial to all sections of the country.

Now, we do not really agree that slavery was the cause of the War Between the States, but it certainly was exploited as the divisive issue which helped to enlist support for the war in the North, especially among the Puritans and Quakers. Continuing with Van Evrie:

So stands the case between the sections. If the “anti-slavery” party was based on truth – if the negro, except in color, was a man like ourselves – if social subordination of this negro was wrong, and the four millions of these people at the South entitled to the same liberty as ourselves – and if the men who made this government designed it to include the inferior races of this continent, and it were really beneficial to equalize and fraternize with these negroes, then, though it may be doubted, if using the common government to bring it about were proper, the end in view would be so beneficent, and such a transcendent act of justice to these assumed slaves, that all honest, earnest, and patriotic citizens should promptly sustain the party now striving to accomplish it. But, on the contrary, if this party is based on a stupendous falsehood – if the negro is a different and inferior being, and in his normal condition at the South – and if the men who made this government, designed it for white men alone – then the length and breadth and width and depth of the “anti-slavery” delusion, and the crime of the “anti-slavery” party, which has broken up the Union in a blind crusade after negro freedom, will be fully comprehended by the American people. The whole mighty question, therefore, with all its vast and boundless consequences, hinges on the apparently simple question of fact – is the negro, except in color, a man like ourselves, and therefore naturally entitled to the same liberty?

It is absolutely certain that neither the liberty, the rights, nor the interests of one single northern citizen is involved; nothing whatever but a blind and foolish theory of “negro slavery” which is attempted to be forced on the South. If the people of the two great sections of the country could change places, the vast “anti-slavery” delusion would be exploded in sixty days. But as this is impossible, the next best thing is to explain the actual condition of things in the South to the northern mind. This great work the author has undertaken, not to defend an imaginary slavery, for it needs no defense, but to explain the social order – to demonstrate to the senses, as well as the reason, that the negro is a different and subordinate being, and in his normal condition at the South and thus to show the enormous and fathomless folly, crime, and impiety wrapped up in the great “anti-slavery” delusion of the day. The former edition of this work was put to press so hurriedly, that it contained many errors, but the present one has been carefully revised; and, moreover, the introductory chapter has been rewritten, in order to present a more distinct history of the origin and progress of the great British “anti-slavery” imposture which is now working out its legitimate and designed purpose in the destruction of the American Union.

We have always said that the abolitionist movement in America was financed and promoted principally by the Rothschilds. Continuing with Van Evrie:

In conclusion, the author begs to say, that mere literary display or fine writing is with him quite a subordinate consideration. He only desires to be understood, and, that the grand and momentous truths described in this book shall be clearly comprehended by the masses, with the confident assurance that when they come to understand that their own liberty, welfare, and prosperity are all hazarded in a blind crusade after that which, could it be accomplished, would be the greatest calamity ever inflicted on a civilized people, the causeless and senseless, but frightful sectional conflict now raging will be speedily terminated by the universal uprising of the northern masses in favor of a government of white men, and union with the South.

Of course, the preamble to the American constitution is ignored to this day, so there should be no doubt it was overthrown in 1861, and every act of government since then has in reality been an act of tyranny, but that is another subject separate from our purpose here.

Van Evrie’s writings were Christian in nature, and he certainly seemed to have faith in the English Bible. But he soundly rejected what he called monogenism, or the belief in a single genesis for all races. We also reject that belief, as it is certainly not what the Bible teaches. Van Evrie correctly believed that Negros had an origin other than the patriarch and race of Adam.

The Wikipedia article for Van Evrie states in part that “His thought, which lacked significant scientific evidence even for the time, emphasized the inferiority of black people to white people, defended slavery as practiced in the United States and attacked abolitionism….” But here we must ask, did Van Evrie’s thought really lack “significant scientific evidence even for the time”, or is Wikipedia merely manufacturing or repeating propaganda? If we can find a reputable source which upheld Van Evrie’s findings on a scientific basis, then Wikipedia is willfully misrepresenting the truth of the matter. Furthermore, if we can find such a reputable source which upheld Van Evrie’s conclusions, then we must admit that the claims of recent science are radically different than they were in past decades, and we should enquire as to why science has changed if in the first place it was based on quantifiable observation.

We are not employing Wikipedia in this manner because it is authoritative. Rather, we are only picking on Wikipedia because it is a source readily at hand and it is representative of modern mainstream thinking in this area which is portrayed by modern media.

So indeed, we have found a source which upheld Van Evrie’s conclusions, in the article for the Negro which is found in the ninth edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Here we shall see that Van Evrie’s findings were indeed accepted as scientific “even for the time”, and not only for the time when he published his book, but for 50 years after is was published. So here we are going to present this article nearly in its entirety. But first, this is, in part, what Wikipedia says of the Encyclopedia Britannica itself:

The Britannica is the oldest English-language encyclopaedia/encyclopedia still in production. It was first published between 1768 and 1771 in the Scottish capital of Edinburgh, as three volumes. The encyclopaedia grew in size: the second edition was 10 volumes, and by its fourth edition (1801–1810) it had expanded to 20 volumes. Its rising stature as a scholarly work helped recruit eminent contributors, and the 9th (1875–1889) and 11th editions (1911) are landmark encyclopaedias for scholarship and literary style….

Thanks to our dear friend Clifton Emahiser, we have copies of both the ninth and eleventh editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica on our bookshelves. Seeing that Wikipedia had called the ninth edition of Britannica a “landmark encyclopaedia for scholarship and literary style”, how can it be denied that this is not only a viable, but even an authoritative source for what is “scientific” for its time? Indeed, by their own standards, in their own words, it must be accepted as such a source. And once it is seen that John Van Evrie was credited in the bibliography of the Encyclopedia Britannica in its article on the Negro, then Wikipedia’s slander of Van Evrie becomes evident for what it is: an attempt to discredit a legitimate scientific view of the 19th century for obvious modern political reasons. Van Evrie was credited in the bibliography for this article, and the content of the article supports Van Evrie’s conclusions, by which his views have full vindication as being scientifically valid.

The following article on the Negro is from Volume 17 of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Ninth Edition, published in 1894. We shall not present the entire article for the podcast, but it is found in its entirety in both facsimile and in the written version which shall accompany this podcast presentation. Footnotes have been converted to Endnotes, and will also mostly be omitted from the podcast, but are included in the written version. All notes in [brackets] are my own:

NEGRO (Spanish and Italian Negro, from Latin Niger, black) in anthropology designates the distinctly dark as opposed to the fair, yellow, and brown varieties of mankind. In this its widest sense it embraces all the dark races, whose original home are the intertropical and subtropical regions of the eastern hemisphere, stretching roughly from Senegambia, West Africa, to the Fiji Archipelago, Pacific Ocean, west and east, and lying north and south between the extreme parallels of the Philippines and Tasmania. The Negro domain thus originally comprised all Africa south of the Sahara, India south of the Indo-Gangetic plains, Malaysia, and the greater part of Australasia. But this domain has since prehistoric times been intruded upon in the east mainly by peoples of the yellow Mongoloid, in the west mainly by peoples of the fair Caucasic stock. During the early and middle Tertiary epochs it appears to have been gradually broken into two great divisions – by the subsidence of lands, some suppose, which are now flooded by the waters of the Indian Ocean, and to which [English lawyer and zoologist Philip] Sclater has given the name of Lemuria. To these two great eastern and western geographical divisions now correspond the two great ethnical divisions of the Negro stock, – the Papuan or Melanesian of Malaysia and Australasia. and the Negro proper of the African mainland. During the long ages that have elapsed since this separation, the two branches, if originally one, have had time under diverse outward conditions to become differentiated into two sufficiently marked physical types, so that on strictly anthropological as well as geographical grounds it becomes convenient to deal separately with the Papuan and African divisions of the Negro family. The present article is confined to the latter. For the Papuans see [the Britannica article for] NEW GUINEA.

Of course, we do not necessarily believe that Lemuria existed as such, but this article presents it as one possible explanation for the distribution of Negroes across the areas where they were originally found by European explorers. They did not mention Arab trading as a possibility for a negro presence in the East, but there is evidence from other anthropologists that Negros were trade by Arabs as far East as the Philippines and Southeast Asia for many centuries even before the time of Christ. Continuing with Britannica:

Soudan (Súdán), the fertile zone stretching from the Sahara towards the equator nearly across the continent, is usually regarded as the true home of the African Negro. But, according to the views recently advanced by Lepsius, Soudan is rather an intermediate or mixed domain lying between the two Hamitic and Negro ethnical groups, which have respectively occupied northern and southern Africa from the remotest times. Certainly none of the chief native races in Soudan – Mandingo, Joloff, Toucouleur in the west; Kanembu, Haussa, Kanuri in the centre; Maba in Wadai, Nuba in the Nile valley, least of all the Fulahs of the Chad and Niger basins – can be considered as of pure Negro descent. But the same phenomenon of intermixture is presented in the strictly equatorial and south equatorial regions, where the Fans of the Ogoway basin, the Zandey (Niam-Niam), Bongo, Bari, and other Upper-Nilotic tribes, the Waganda of the Victoria Nyanza of the extreme east, the Zulu-Kaffres of the extreme south, are all of Negroid and even sub-Negroid rather than of strictly Negro lineage. Hence the same argument that would exclude Soudan would also exclude the greater part of southern Africa, and we should have to look to the hypothetical Lemuria or other now submerged lands for the cradle of the Negro stock. Practically, however, the whole of Africa south of the Sahara must be taken as the original habitat of the race, which is there almost everywhere still found in compact masses, although rarely perhaps absolutely free from foreign intermixture.

Karl Richard Lepsius, who lived from 1810 to 1884, was a Prussian Egyptologist and linguist and is considered a pioneer of modern archaeology. Notice the use of the Biblical term Hamites, and the view of them as being distinct from Negroes. In the overall context of this article, it is evident that both Hamites and Shemites were considered by the authors to be Caucasic, and to have been groups which were distinct from the Negros. This also supports Van Evrie’s rejection of monogenism, which is the ridiculous idea that all hominids came from Adam. Nevertheless, the article compromises Biblical language and positions with a profession of the concept of evolution, a combination which was not uncommon for the time. Continuing with Britannica:

But wherever found in a comparatively pure state, as on the coast of Guinea [1], in the Gaboon, along the lower Zambesi, and in the Benua and Shari basins, the African aborigines present almost a greater uniformity of physical and moral type than any of the other great divisions of mankind [not, as we shall see, that they have morals, but that they have the same moral type]. By the nearly unanimous consent of anthropologists this type occupies at the same time the lowest position in the evolutionary scale, thus affording the best material for the comparative study of the highest anthropoids and the human species. [Here the Negro is rather objectively considered to be one of the “highest anthropoids” as distinct from the “human species”.] The chief points in which the Negro either approaches the Quadrumana or differs most from his own congeners [which are other anthropoids, a category which can include apes and other primates as well as men, but contrasted to quadrumana must refer to bipeds here] are: (1) the abnormal length of the arm, which in the erect position sometimes reaches the knee-pan, and which on an average exceeds that of the Caucasian by about 2 inches; (2) prognathism, or projection of the jaws (index number of facial angle about 70, as compared with the Caucasian 82); (3) weight of brain, as indicating cranial capacity, 35 ounces (highest gorilla 20, average European 45); (4) full black eye, with black iris and yellowish sclerotic coat, a very marked feature; (5) short flat snub nose, deeply depressed at the base or frontal suture, broad at extremity, with dilated nostrils and concave ridge; (6) thick protruding lips, plainly showing the inner red surface; (7) very large zygomatic arches – high and prominent cheek bones; (8) exceedingly thick cranium, enabling the Negro to butt with the head and resist blows which would inevitably break any ordinary European's skull : (9) correspondingly weak lower limbs, terminating in a broad flat foot with low instep, divergent and somewhat prehensile great toe, and heel projecting backwards ("lark heel") ; (10) complexion deep brown or blackish, and in some cases even distinctly black, due not to any special pigment, as is often supposed, but merely to the greater abundance of the coloring matter in the Malpighian mucous membrane between the inner or true skin and the epidermis or scarf skin [2] ; (11) short, black hair, eccentrically elliptical or almost flat in section, and distinctly woolly, not merely frizzly, as [British doctor and anthropologist James Cowles] Prichard supposed on insufficient evidence ; [3] (12) thick epidermis, cool, soft, and velvety to the touch, mostly hairless, and emitting a peculiar rancid odor, compared by [German physician] Pruner Bey [or Franz Ignaz Pruner] to that of the buck goat; (13) frame of medium height, thrown somewhat out of the perpendicular by the shape of the pelvis, the spine, the backward projection of the head, and the whole anatomical structure ; (14) the cranial sutures, which close much earlier in the Negro than in other races. To this premature ossification of the skull, preventing all further development of the brain, many pathologists have attributed the inherent mental inferiority of the blacks, an inferiority which is even more marked than their physical differences. Nearly all observers admit that the Negro child is on the whole quite as intelligent as those of other human varieties, but that on arriving at puberty all further progress seems to be arrested. No one has more carefully studied this point than [the Italian] Filippo Manetta [The Negro Race in its Wild State], who during a long residence on the plantations of the Southern States of America noted that "the Negro children were sharp, intelligent, and full of vivacity, but on approaching the adult period a gradual change set in. The intellect seemed to become clouded, animation giving place to a sort of lethargy, briskness yielding to indolence. We must necessarily suppose that the development of the Negro and White proceeds on different lines. While with the latter the volume of the brain grows with the expansion of the brain-pan, in the former the growth of the brain is on the contrary arrested by the premature closing of the cranial sutures and lateral pressure of the frontal bone." [4]

The Jew Steven Jay Gould made a career at Harvard issuing refutations of these findings, basically inventing conspiracy theories and accusing anthropologists and other scholars of the 19th century of lying and manufacturing data. [See, for example, Part Four of The Languages of Psyche, subtitled Medicine, Racism, Anti-Semitism: A Dimension of Enlightenment Culture, however the author’s conclusions are different from our own.] Continuing with Britannica:

It must at the same time be confessed that the question of the mental temperament of the Negro has been greatly complicated by the partisanship of interested advocates on either side. But for this disturbing element it would perhaps be readily admitted that the mental are at least as marked as the physical differences between the dark and other races. And as both are the gradual outcome of external conditions, fixed by heredity, it follows that the attempt to suddenly transform the Negro mind by foreign culture must be, as it has proved to be, as futile as the attempt would be to suddenly transform his physical type. On his moral status, even when removed from the old associations and brought directly under more favorable influences, a lurid light is cast by the report of the Rev. Dr. Tucker at the American Church Congress for 1883 on the present condition of the black communities in the Southern States. [5]

[Here we actually quoted and remarked on note 5, which is found in the End Notes section below.]

Below: A brawl erupts in the Ugandan Parliament over a presidential age limit, September, 2017

It is more correct to say of the Negro that he is non-moral [rather] than immoral. All the social institutions are at the same low level, and throughout the historic period seem to have made no perceptible advance except under the stimulus of foreign (in recent time notably of Mohammedan) influences. Religion is a system of pure fetichism and worship of ancestry associated with such sanguinary rites as the “customs” of Dahomey and Ashantee, and a universal belief in sorcery. Slavery continues everywhere to prevail, both as a local institution and a branch of the export trade, where [it is] not checked by European Governments. Much of the surplus population not thus carried off probably finds its way to the shambles [or butcher shops] of the native states in the middle Congo basin and other parts where cannibalism is practiced, and where human flesh appears to be sold in the open market-place. During its voyage down the Congo the Stanley expedition was attacked at many points for the avowed purpose of procuring a fresh supply of human food, and from other incidents of modern exploration cannibalism would seem to prevail very generally in the little known equatorial regions of the interior. [6] Political institutions are in a rudimentary state, and where a higher system has been imposed or adopted from the whites, as in Liberia, it does not appear to have materially contributed to the improvement of the race. The great bulk of the natives are still in the tribal condition, while in the kingdoms that have been founded in Guinea and elsewhere the authority of the sovereign is everywhere absolute, and its exercise often marked by the most wanton and atrocious cruelty. The largest and most powerful native state is that of Ulunda, whose present "muata yanvo," or ruler, is the fourteenth in descent from the founder of the dynasty. When visited in 1879 by Dr. Buchner, this potentate, to impress his guest with his power, caused one of his subjects to assume the part of a chief just arrived from a remote province of the empire. The sham cortège of soldiers and women advanced to the throne, all thickly plastered with mud from head to foot, and the "chief" approaching on all fours deliberately rolled himself in the sand at his majesty's feet. The administration of justice is regulated, not by any sense of right or wrong, but by the caprice of the king, who is himself often in the power of the navumbula, or witch-detector. Beyond what has been acquired from without, of letters there is absolutely no knowledge, unless an exception be made in favor of the invention or adaptation of a rude syllabic system some years ago by a native of the Vei tribe. Hence literature is purely oral, and limited to a few tribal legends, some folklore, proverbs, and songs of the simplest kind. The arts also are exclusively of an industrial character, and restricted mainly to coarse weaving, pottery, the smelting and working of metals (chiefly copper and iron), agriculture, and grazing. Architecture has no existence, nor are there any monumental ruins or stone structures of any sort in the whole of Negroland except those erected in Soudan under Hamitic and Semitic influences. No full-blood Negro has ever been distinguished as a man of science, a poet, or an artist, and the fundamental equality claimed for him by ignorant philanthropists is belied by the whole history of the race throughout the historic period.

Here we must offer the opinion that metallurgy, course weaving and pottery must also have been brought to the Negro from outside, in the prehistoric period, as the Negro has developed no other arts or crafts of any great significance since the time in which he acquired those. Continuing with Britannica:

On the other hand the native languages, all of which belong to the agglutinating order, are often very highly developed, and the Bantu group especially is characterized by an intricacy of structure and an alliterative phonetic system of an exceedingly delicate type. [7] From the wide range of this Bantu speech, which occupies all the southern half of the continent except the Hottentot and Bushman territory in the extreme southwest, Lepsius concludes that it is the original language of the Negro race, and that the numerous linguistic groups of Soudan are merely scattered fragments of that speech or of the Hamitic intruding from the north. Thus has been developed his theory of the two ethnical and linguistic stocks originally in exclusive possession of North and South Africa, and gradually amalgamating in the now diversified intermediate zone of Soudan. But this theory cannot be accepted as at all adequate to explain the present conditions in those regions. It is not by any means certain that the Bantu itself was originally a Negro language at all. There seems, moreover, to be good reason for believing that its present diffusion over South Africa dates from comparatively recent times, and that it is due to the intrusion of foreign conquerors penetrating from the northeast up the Nile valley and through the region of the great lakes into the Congo and Zambesi basins. Nor is it possible to regard the Mandingo, Vei, Haussa, Fulah, and many other Soudanese tongues as fragments or offshoots of Bantu, from which they differ as fundamentally as they do from each other.

To Dr. Gustav Nachtigal [8] [a German surgeon, explorer, author and diplomat] is due the recent discovery or determination of another independent and widespread linguistic family, which had its original home amongst the Hamitic Teda or northern Tubus of the eastern Sahara, and which, gradually spreading southwards, has been imposed through the Dasa or southern Tubus on the Kanembu and Kanuri of Lake Chad, the Baele of Wanyanga, the Zoghawa of Dar-Fur, and other Negro or Negroid peoples of central and eastern Soudan. The whole of Soudan, or, more correctly, the whole of Central Africa between the equator and the Sahara, is in fact a region of linguistic confusion, such as is elsewhere found only in Caucasia, Melanesia, the Anamese highlands, and some parts of America. Several radically distinct stock languages have already been determined, especially in Guinea, Senegambia, and the Chad basin. But many more are known to be current in Adamawa, Bornu, Baghirmi, Wadai, Dar-Fur, the White Nile Valley, while others will doubtless be revealed by the future exploration of the lands watered by the Welle, Aruwimi, Mangala, and other streams flowing either to the Nile, the Congo, or the Shari. Most of them may be properly designated as strictly Negro tongues. But in the north, that is, along the skirt of the Sahara, and in the east, that is in the Blue Nile and Atbara basins, in Kaffa, Galla, and Somaliland, the current speech is mainly Caucasic, and here also the populations are mainly Negroid and sub-Negroid rather than of pure Negro descent. The Caucasic speech again is represented by Hamitic, Tubu, and Semitic groups, all intruders in this Negro domain from prehistoric times except the Semitic Arabic, which dates only from the introduction of Islam. In attempting a complete, however brief, survey of this vast ethnical and linguistic area, account must also be taken of other disturbing elements within the area itself, which are of unknown origin, and whose actual relations to the surrounding Negro masses are still involved in much obscurity. Conspicuous amongst them are the Nubas of the Middle Nile, apparently intermediate between the true Negro and the Egyptian Hamite ; the Fulahs of central and west Soudan, who, although now much mixed, seem to have been originally distinct both from the Negro and the Hamite; the Fans, who have in recent times reached the west coast just above the equator, and who are also a clearly non-Negro race ; lastly, the dwarfish Akkas, Obongos, and others, who appear to be scattered over the whole of the continent south of 10° N. lat. Many, perhaps the majority, of the Bantu-speaking southern races – Waswahili of the Zanzibar coast, Waganda and others of the great lacustrine region, Zulu-Kaffres of the southeast, Marutse of the Zambesi, Ovambos of the southwest coast – are also variously affected by foreign elements, some no doubt either Arab or Hamitic Galla penetrating from the northeast, but others drawn from now long-forgotten sources. Thus the popular idea that Negroland presents a homogeneous ethnical field must be dismissed as absolutely erroneous. It will be safer to say that, while the Negro strain is here everywhere conspicuously present, it has been repeatedly crossed and re-crossed by diverse interminglings, which began with the first appearance of the Hamite on African soil, and which have been continued from that vastly remote epoch down to the present time. [9]

So our authors did understand that Hamites and Semites both were “Caucasic”, even if they did not realize – or at least admit – that they were originally and completely of the European variety of Caucasian, and that today’s specimens in the Middle East are all bastards. They also understood that Negros had a separate origin, and that these Whites in Africa were mixing with Negros at a very early time, and also that at least most Negros were mixed in this manner. Continuing with Britannica:

From the subjoined rough scheme of classification of the chief Negro and Negroid races and languages are excluded the above-mentioned Caucasic-speaking Hamites and Semites, who hem in the Negro zone proper by a mighty ethnical barrier stretching almost continuously from the Senegal river through the Sahara, Abyssinia, and Gallaland to the east coast at the equator. From it are also omitted the Hovas, Sakalavas, Betsimisarakas, and other peoples of Madagascar, all of Malagasy (Malayo-Polynesian) speech, as well as the Bosjesman and Hottentot groups of the extreme southwest, as lying beyond the scope of the present survey.

West Soudan and Guinea.

Mandingan Group : Mande, Kabunga, Laudoro, Tene, Gbandi, Susu, Mano, Toma, Gbese, Vei (?). Mainly in South Senegambia and Upper Guinea.

Woloff Group : Joloff, Kayor, Dakar, Baol, Sine, Walo, Bambara (?). Mainly between the Senegal and Gambia rivers.

Felup Group : Felup, Bola, Serere, Filnam, Pepel, Diola, Kalium, Biafada, Pajade, Temue, Kissi, Sherbro, Between the Gambia and Sierra Leone.

Liberian Group : Deh, Queah, Gurrah, Kru, Kondo, Pessa, Golla, Bassa, Kabo, Yedabo, Grebo, Babo, Webo, Tebo, Nyambo. Grain and Ivory coasts.

Ewe Group : Acra (Ga), Fantee, Ashantee, Ffon. Mina, Jeji, Dahoman, Nago, Otyi, Yoruba. Gold and Slave coasts.

lbo Group: lbo, Nupe, Michi, Oru, Wari, Igara, Juku, Kororofa, Ado, Akoto. Binue and lower Niger.

Sonhray: Large historical nation. Middle Niger, from Timbuktu to Gando. Distinct speech.

Fulah: Futa Jallo, Futa-Toro, Jel, Baa, So, Mabube, Laube, Beri. Senegambia and in scattered groups eastwards to Baghirmi. Distinct speech.

Central Soudan and Chad Basin.

Adamawa Group : Batta, Dama, Fala, Buma, Marga, Holma, Ba, Bula, Kilba, Baza, Mbafu, Kotafa, Woka, Fani, Doga, Longoda. Upper Binue ; thence east to Logon.

Tuba Group : Teda, Dasa, Kanembu, Dalatoa, Kanuri, Danawa, Haussa (?), Baele, Bodele, Bulala (?), Kuka (?), Zoghawa. Tibesti, Kanem, Bornu, Borku, and north Dar-Fur.

Logon Group : Logon, Mandara, Margi, Makari, Mosgu, Gamergu, So (extinct), Keribina, Yedina (Buduma), Kuri (Kalea), Bede, Ngisem, Kerrikerri, Babir, Fika. Bornu, lower Shari (between Adamawa and Baghirmi), Chad archipelagoes.

Baghirmi Group : Baghirmi, Somrai, Tummok, Kuang, Busso, Gaberi, Nyillem, Ndamm, Sâra, Dekakire, Sokoro, Bua Kullanga, Bua Kuli, Yussiye, Sarûa. Lower and middle Shari, east to Runga and Dar-Banda.

Wadai Group : Maba (Kelingen, Kajanga, Malanga, Kuno, Bili, and many other subdivisions), Masalit, Mimi, Marfa, Koruuga, Moëwo, Abyi, Kondongo, Kabbaga, Mubi, Marta, Bakka, Birkit, Tala. Wadai and east Dar-Fur.

East Soudan and Upper Nile.

Dar-Banda Group: Runga, Kredy, Ago, Silla, Bandala, Daggel, Gulla, Faua, Birrimbirri, Seli, Kutingara. Upper Shari, east to Dar-Fertit.

Fur Group : Fur (Foraug-bele), Dudunga, Kunjara, Kera, Massabât, Tunjur, Dajo, Berti, Bego, Birguid, Berdûna, Jellaba, Sungor, Mararit, Jebal, Guimir, Kabga. Dar-Fur and Kardofan, between Wadai and White Nile.

Nilotic Group : Shilluk, Nuer, Dinka, Bongo, Jur, Bari, Mittu, Rôl, Millow, Agar, Sofi, Lehssi, Ayell, Ayarr, Monbuttu, Janghey, Fallaugh, Miauk, Bonjak, Jibbe, Kunkung, Nikuar, Madi, Loboré, Shuli, Berta, Amam. White Nile and its tributaries, east to Kaffa and Gallaland, south to Uganda.

Zandey (Niam-Niam): Large, compact nation, about the Welle, and reaching southwards probably to the Lualaba.

South Africa – Bantu Family.

Zulu-Kaffre Group : Ama-Zulu, Ama-Khosa. Ama-Fingu, Ma-Tonga, Ama Zuazi, Ba-Tembu, Matebele, Mazitu, Masai (?). Zulu land, Natal, Kaffraria, and in scattered fragments from the Limpopo north to the great lakes.

Central Group : Be-Chuana, Ba-Suto, Ba-Rolong, Ma-Ko-lolo, Ma-Rotse, Ma-Kalaka (Ma-Nansa), Ma-Laya, Ma-Totola, Ma-Shukulombwe, Ma-Shubia, Ma-Nchoia, Ma-Mbunda, Ba-Libale, Ma-Pingula, Ma-Hes, Ba-Yeiye. Upper Orange river, Transvaal, Like [sic Lake] Ngami, upper and middle Zambesi, and Chobe river. [10]

Eastern Group: Wa-Swahili, Wa-Pokomo, Wa-Nika, Wa-Kamba, Wa-Sambarg, Wa-Zaramo, Achikunda, Ma-Gololo, A-Nyasa, Wa-Yao, Ma-Chinga, A-Ngulu (Walolo), Ma-Kua, Ma-Tumboka, Wa-Jagga, Wa-Segua. East coast from the equator south to Delagoa Bay, and inland to Lake Nyassa.

Equatorial Group : Wa-Ganda, Wa-Nyoro, Wa-Nyamwesi, Wa-Sukuma, Wa-Legga, Wa-Rundi, Wa-Lha, Wa-Fipa, Wa-Bemba, Wa-Bisa, Wa-Rua, Wa-Lunda, Kioko, Wa-Shinsh, Tu-Shinsh, Tu-Shilange, Tu-Ruba, Tu-Kette, Ba-Songe (Ba-Luba), A-Kawanda (Ma-Wanda), Ba-Tetela, Ba-Kuba, Lovalé, Wa-Mangala, Ibonga, Ba-Rumbe, Ba-Bwende. Region of the great lakes, upper and middle Lualaba, south to the Lokinga (Mushinga) range.

Western Group : Ova-Herero, Ova-Mbo, Ova-Quanyama, Kibokwe, Bailunda, Kibanda, Kisanji, Nano, Sindonga, Ba-Songo, Ma-Tamba, Ma-Yakka, Ba-Kongo, Kimbunda, Ma-Hungo, Shissilongi, Ma-Yombe, Ba-Teke, Obamba, Odumbo, Aduma, Bakota, Mbamba, Ashongo, Apinji, Okanda, Bangwé, Mpongwé, Ba-Kalai, Isubu, Bimbia, Ba-Kwilleh, Dualla, Abo, Wuri, Qua Qua (Ba-Koko), Lungasi, Edea, Bubi (Fernandian). West coast from Damaraland north to the Cameroon mountains ; inland to about 20° E. long. [11]

The total population is vaguely estimated at 130,000,000, to which must be added probably about 20,000,000 full-blood and half-caste Negroes settled either as slaves or the descendants of slaves in various parts of the world, but chiefly in tropical and subtropical America. Owing to their peculiar qualities, great muscular development, and power of endurance in hot and moist lands, combined with a remarkable absence of personal self-respect, the African populations have from the remotest times supplied a chief material to the slave-markets of the Old and the New World. For thousands of years an incessant stream of black blood has been directed from the interior to the east coast and thence to Madagascar, Arabia, Persia, and even India, or down the Nile to Egypt and Asia Minor, or across the Sahara to the Barbary States. Since the discovery of America hundreds of thousands have in the same way been shipped from the west coast for the West Indies, New Spain, the British and French plantations, and Brazil. Speaking generally, this black element has not amalgamated with the populations of the eastern hemisphere, and has consequently left few traces of its presence anywhere except in Madagascar, where there may possibly have been an indigenous Negro people before the arrival of the intruding Hovas and other Malay tribes. [Our editor seems to have taken it for granted that the Hamitic race was originally brown, which is not true. It was originally White, and much of it had become mixed in prehistoric times unobserved by modern Europeans.] Nevertheless, a strain of Negro blood is apparent, not only amongst the Tuaregs and especially the Tibus of the Sahara, but also in Morocco, South Algeria, Egypt, the low-lying Tohama of the West Arabian seaboard, Makran, and even here and there along the coast of Malabar and Ceylon. But no statistics are anywhere here available which might throw some light on the proportion of blacks to the surrounding populations. We read that there may be as many as 100,000 in Morocco, a large number amongst the Berbers of Wargla (South Algeria), and Tripoli, and so on. It is also evident that a decided majority of the inhabitants of Madagascar must be regarded as of Negroid stock, although no Negro language has held its ground either there or anywhere beyond the Negro domain proper.

This is the more surprising that in some parts of America, notably the West Indian Islands, the colored has actually replaced the indigenous and largely absorbed the white element. Here we are altogether on firmer ground, and fairly accurate returns enable us to form an approximate estimate of the proportion of full-blood and half-caste Negroes in almost every part of the New World. On the other hand, the nomenclature of these mongrels has become so perplexing, and is often applied so irregularly, that it has led to many misconceptions on this point. [It is refreshing to see an objective use of the appropriate term mongrels in an academic article describing people of mixed races.] Thus the term "Creole," applicable in Mexico only to persons of pure Spanish descent, denotes in Brazil, Peru, and elsewhere the presence of black blood in varying proportions. Of this bewildering nomenclature the chief terms are as under :

Negro, African, Black : Full-blood Negro, whether born in Africa or of African descent.

Mulatto : Issue of black and white parents either way – a constant term in America.

Mestizo : Any half-breed, whether of white and Negro parents, or (more commonly in Spanish America) of white and Indian parents.

Creole : Mostly white of pure descent, but also blacks of pure descent (Brazil), the issue of whites and Mestizoes (Peru), and Mestizoes generally (Alaska). [12]

Zambo : Any half-breed, but mostly the issue of Negro and Indian parents ; in the United States, Peru, and West Indies of Negro and Mulatto ; in St. Vincent the half-caste Caribs.

Zambo Preto : Issue of Negro father and Zamba mother (Mexico and elsewhere).

Cholo: Issue of Zamboes (South America).

Pardo: Synonymous with Mulatto (Brazil); any Mestizo (Argentine States).

Mamaluco : Any Mestizo, but especially the issue of whites and Indians (Brazil).

Chino : Negro and Indian half-caste (Mexico, and generally in Spanish America).

Casco : Direct issue of Mulattoes on both sides (South America).

Tente en el Ayre : Mongrels in whom the white element predominates (South America).

Cafuso : Issue of Negro and Indian, dark shade and woolly hair predominating (Brazil).

Caburet : Issue of Negress and Indian (Brazil).

Caribico, Tupanhuna, Xibaro : Local Brazilian terms of Tupi origin applied to various crosses between the Negroes and Indians.

Quarteroon, Quinteroon, Octoroon: Negro and white half-breeds, with fresh infusion of white blood each successive generation. Thus: Quarteroon has one-fourth, Quinteroon one-eighth, Octoroon one-sixteenth black blood only, the last being scarcely distinguishable from a white. [13]

Before the suppression of the slave trade, during the first half of the present century, from 60,000 to 70,000 Negroes were annually shipped to America, where their descendants of all shades now number altogether upwards of twelve millions as under:

(Published in 1894.)

Colored Element.

Proportion to the Whole Population.

United States…………………..


13 per cent.



½ per cent.

Central America……………….


1 per cent.

West Indies…………….


83 per cent.



20 per cent.

In Hayti [Haiti] the Africans have established their political autonomy, here forming two independent states, with total population 820,000. [The author does not inform us that this was accomplished during a mass butchering of Whites by Negros in 1804.] Elsewhere slavery has been everywhere abolished, except in Brazil, where it is rapidly becoming extinct. Hence the whole of the colored population now constitutes a class of freedmen, in some places apparently dying out (Central America, Argentine States), in some remaining stationary (Mexico, Peru), but in others increasing rapidly. This is especially the case in the United States, as shown by the subjoined returns for the whole of the present century:

(Published in 1894.)

Colored Element.

Proportion to the Whole Population.



19 per cent.



19 per cent.



17 per cent.



14 per cent.



13 per cent.



13 per cent.

It is obvious from this table that the Negroes, without any further importations from Africa, are increasing far more rapidly than the native whites, and that they would ultimately become the predominant element in the Southern States but for the constant stream of migration flowing from Europe to North America. Owing to this migration they decreased relatively to the rest of the population from 1820 to 1860. But since then they have maintained their relative proportion in spite of this migration. Recently they have themselves begun to move westwards at the rate of about 50,000 annually. Should the movement continue, an equilibrium may be established, because the rate of mortality gains on the birth-rate, according as they move farther away from the hot Southern States, where alone the race can expect to establish itself in the republic.

Of course this is no longer true. With modern technical advances in transportation and heating, Negros can now live anywhere, as Whites also can live in tropical zones with the advent of air conditioning.

The author of this Britannica article was Augustus Henry Keane, an Irish Catholic journalist, linguist, geographer and ethnologist who studied in Germany and taught in Germany and in England. Leaving London in 1885 he spent a period of time lecturing on ethnology at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, a place which could certainly use his lectures today. Wikipedia mentions this very article in its own brief article on Keane, where it is evident that Wikipedia also misrepresents the character and scope of Keane’s ethnological views in what is apparently a weak attempt to discredit this particular article on the Negro. The Wikipedia article admits that Keane wrote articles for the Encyclopedia Britannica, and then says that those “articles included ‘Negro’ in the 9th edition, which included details of the racial theory of Filippo Manetta.” This too is a misrepresentation, as this article on the Negro included the findings of dozens of academic works in the field, and not only those of Manetta.

In its Bibliography, it also credited Dr. John Van Evrie and the book from which we had included the Preface here:

Bibliography. – Pruner Bey, Mémoire sur les Nègres [Memoir of the Negroes], Paris, 1861 ; Winwood Reade, Savage Africa ; Karl Vogt, Vorlesungen über den Menschen [Lectures on Man] ; Filippo Manetta, La Razza Negra nel suo stato selvaggio e nella sua duplice condizione di emancipata e di schiava [The Black Race in its savage state and in its dual status of emancipated and slave], Turin, 1864 ; John Campbell, Negromania, Philadelphia, 1851 ; J. F. Blumenbach, De Generis Humani Varietate Nativa [On the Natural Varieties of Mankind], Göttingen, 1775 ; Lawrence, Physiology, Zoology, and Natural History of Man, 1819 ; Dr. Paul Broca, "Memoirs" in Bulletins de la Soc. d' Anthropologie, 1860-78; Dr. Van Evrie, On Negroes and Negro Slavery ; Brehm, Reise-Skizzen aus Nordost-Africa [Travel sketches from Northeast Africa] ; Col. Hamilton Smith, Natural History of the Human Species, Edinburgh, 1848 ; Hutchinson, Wanderings in West Africa ; George MacHenry, The Cotton Trade and Negro Slavery, London, 1863; S. G. Morton, Crania Ægyptiaca ; Peter A. Browne, Classification of Mankind by the Hair and Wool of their Heads ; Nott and Gliddon, Indigenous Races of the Earth, Philadelphia, 1857 ; Wilson, Ethnographic View of West Africa, New York, 1856 ; Prichard, Natural History of Man, London, 1855 ; Latham, Varieties of Man, London, 1850 ; E. B. Taylor, Anthropology, London, 1881 ; Pickering, Races of Man, London, 1850 ; R. N. Cust, A Sketch of the Modem Languages of Africa, London, 1883 ; F. L. James, The Wild Tribes of the Sudan, London, 1883. The writings of the travellers Leo Africanus, Bruce, Mungo Park, Denham, Clapperton, Lander, Burckhardt, Barth, Richardson, Nachtigal, Schweinfurth, Baker, Junker, Beltrami, for Soudan and Nile basin; of Krapf, Du Chaillu, Burton, Speke and Grant, Livingstone, Magyar, Cameron, Fritsche, Bleek, Lentz, Pogge and Wissmann, Schuver, Holub, Mohr, Buchner, Gussfeldt, for equatorial and South Africa. (A. H. K.)

The article for Negro found in the later eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, published in 1911, had retained much of the language and many of the conclusions which we have seen here in this article, and even the citations from Filippo Manetta for which Wikipedia criticizes Keane. That later article was written in part by Walter Francis Willcox, who had a Master of Arts degree and then a Bachelor of Laws degree and also a Ph. D. and who was at one time the Chief Statistician for the U.S. Census Bureau and a Professor of Social Science and Statistics at Cornell University. One paper written by Willcox was a report titled Negroes in the United States for the Census Bureau which was published by the government in 1904. Another and earlier paper was Negro Criminality, which was delivered as an address to the Social Science Association at Saratoga, New York in 1899. It is no surprise that the 1911 Britannica article by Willcox on the Negro, which retained many of the conclusions of Keane, also expanded on this aspect of Negro behavior. The main body of the article was written by British Anthropologist Thomas Athol Joyce, and the Wikipedia article for Willcox only states that the 1911 Britannica article “is of interest today for the insight it gives into racial prejudices of the time.”

So speaking of Keane, a non-scientist who wrote of scientific conclusions, Wikipedia described him as being “out of step with the anthropology of the time”. Then speaking of Van Evrie, whom Keane had cited and who was a doctor sharing those same conclusions, Wikipedia had said that he “lacked significant scientific evidence” for his views. This is in spite of the fact that the article was also drawn fom and cited many other scientific sources. Then where professional and scientific men such as Willcox and Joyce also shared the very same conclusions in the later Britannica eleventh edition article, Wikipedia dismisses scientific findings as mere “racial prejudices of the time”. If any of the conclusions from our sources this evening are lacking “scientific evidence”, “out of step” and should be off-handedly dismissed as “prejudices”, it is those of Wikipedia, which are patently and even blatantly dishonest.

We hope to discuss Willcox and the later 1911 Britannica article on the Negro in the near future, and in that manner we hope to continue this examination on academic attitudes towards the Negro in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We also hope to be able to investigate just why and how such objective and demonstrably valid scientific assessments of the Negro character suddenly began to change, and how those who came to such conclusions based on sound scientific evidence have even suffered ridicule for doing so in the ensuing decades.

End Notes for the 1894 Britannica article on the Negro:

[1] Here apparently is to be met the most pronounced Negro type proper yet discovered. See the missionary Wilson's Ethnographic View of Western Africa, New York, 1856. published anonymously. [Harper Brother’s, New York, l956, published this work, with the title in full, “Western Africa; Its History, Condition, and Prospects. By Rev. J. Leighton Wilson.” It was not anonymous. Am. Ed.]

[2] It is also noteworthy that the dark color seems to depend neither on geographical position, the isothermals of greatest heat, nor even altogether on racial purity. The extremes of the chromatic scale are found in juxtaposition throughout the whole Negro domain, in Senegambia, the Gaboon, upper Nile basin, Lower Congo, Shari valley, Mozambique. In the last region Froberville determined the presence of thirty-one different shades from dusky or yellow-brown to sooty black. Some of the sub-Negroid and mixed races, such as many Abyssimans, Gallas, Joloffs, and Mandingoes, are quite as black as the darkest full-blood Negro. A general similarity in the outward conditions of soil, atmosphere, climate, food charged with an excess of carbon. such as the fruit of the butter-tree, and other undetermined causes have tended to develop a tendency towards dark shades everywhere in the Negro domain apart from the bias mainly due to an original strain of black blood. Even the African Arabs are described by Burckhardt, De Pagès, and other observers as often decidedly black. Waddington mentions more particularly the Shegya Arabs south of Dongola on the White Nile as distinguished by their “clear, glossy, jet black” (p. 149). The same expression "jet black" is applied by Schweinfurth to the Upper-Nilotic Shilluks, Nuers, and Dinkas, while the neighboring Bongos and Mittus are described as of a "red-brown” color “like the soil upon which they reside” (Heart of Africa. i. p. 261).

[3] This point has been fully determined by P. A. Brown (Classification of Mankind by the Hair, etc.), who shows conclusively that, unlike true hair and like true wool, the negro hair is flat, issues from the epidermis at a right angle, is spirally twisted or crisped, has no central duct, the coloring matter being disseminated through the cortex and intermediate fibres, while the cortex itself is covered with numerous rough, pointed filaments adhering loosely to the shaft ; lastly, the Negro pile will felt, like wool, whereas true hair cannot be felted. Observing that the Negro domain is also the habitat of the most anthropoid apes – gorilla and chimpanzee – and that these bimanous and quadrumanous species are both of a pronounced dolichocephalic type (index Nos. 72-75), some anthropologists have suggested the direct descent of the former from the latter. But against this view may be urged the different texture of the pile, which although black in both , is woolly in the Negro but true hair in the ape. It may further he noted that in the eastern section of the dark domain, while the Papuan is still black and dolichocephalic, often excessively so, his presumed progenitor the orang-outang is, on the contrary, brachycephalic, with decidedly red hair. Dr. Bernard Davis also recognizes brachycephaly in equatorial Africa itself, four out of the eighteen skulls from this region in his collection being distinctly of the round-headed type, and Schweinfurth describes the Bongos as “hardly removed from the lowest grade of brachycephaly” (i. 263).

[4] La Razza Negra nel suo stato selvaggio, etc., Turin, 1864, p. 20.

[5] "I know of whole neighborhoods," he tells us, "where there is not one single Negro couple, whether legally married or not, who are faithful to each other beyond a few weeks. In the midst of a prayer-meeting I have known Negroes steal from each other, and on the way home they will rob any hen-roost that lies conveniently at hand. The most pious Negro that I know is confined in a penitentiary for an atrocious murder, and he persists in saying he can see no offence against God in his crime, though he acknowledges an offence against man." Mention is further made of Negro missionaries guilty of the grossest immorality, living in open concubinage, addicted to thieving, lying, and every imaginary crime, yet all “earnest and successful preachers, and wholly unconscious of hypocrisy. Their sins, universally known, did not diminish their influence with their race. It was impossible to doubt their absolute sincerity.” A much darker picture is presented by the independent Negro commonwealths of Hayti, for eighty years the scene of almost uninterrupted fratricidal strife.

The entire “baby’s daddy” and “single mother” phenomenon informs us that Rev. Tucker was correct, and his remarks fully justified by history. Much of this also sounds as if it could describe the careers of Negro clergymen such as Martin Luther King Jr., Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, except that it was written nearly a hundred years before those men began their careers.

[6] Amongst the Niam-Niam "human fat is universally sold," while "the Fans barter their dead among themselves," and even disinter them to be devoured (Heart of Africa, ii. pp. 18, 19). Still more pronounced is the cannibalism of the Monbuttu, who dry the bodies of the slain in battle for future consumption, and "drive their prisoners before them, as butchers drive sheep to the shambles, and these are only reserved to fall victims on a later day to their horrible and sickly greediness " (Ib., ii. p. 93).

[7] For this remarkable linguistic phenomenon see vol. xiii. p. 829.

[8] Sahara und Sudan, Berlin, 1881, vol. ii. p. 283 sq. See also "North African Ethnology." by A. H. Keane, in Nature for March 1, 1883.

[9] In support of th is conclusion, which to some may seem overdrawn, appeal might be made to the language of many modern African explorers, one of the most careful of whom thus expresses himself: "If we could at once grasp and set before our minds facts that are known (whether as regards language, face, culture, history, or development) of that vast region of the world which is comprehended in the name of Africa, we should have before us the witness of an intermingling of races which is beyond all precedent. And yet, bewildering as the prospect would appear, it remains a fact not to be gainsaid, that it is impossible for any one to survey the country as a whole without perceiving that high above the multitude of individual differences there is throned a principal of unity, which embraces well-nigh all the population" (Schweinfurth, op. cit., i. p. 313). The principle of unity here spoken of is the autochthonous black element, mostly predominant, and everywhere forming the substratum, nearly as far north as the tropic of Cancer.

[10] The Ma-Kololo, as a distinct people, have been destroyed by the Ma-Rotse; but their language (a mixed Se-Chuana and Se-Suto dialect) survives as the lingua franca in the Ma-Rotse state, and generally between the Limpopo and Zambesi (Dr. Holub and Père Depelchin).

[11] Intruders in the northern sections of this group are the non-Negro Fans, the Osbyeba of the other natives. There are two main divisions, – Make-Fan on the left, Mbelé-Fan on the right bank of the Ogoway.

[12] [In Brazil and Peru different admixtures of race are known by distinct names. In the West Indies, Spanish America, and those parts of the United States where descendants of Spanish and French colonists still remain distinguishable, as in Louisiana, the term Creole is applied only to pure native descendants of European races. See Words, Facts, and Phrases, London, 1882 ; Bartlett's Americanisms, Boston, 1877. Some English authorities make a different but unusual, application of the word. Am. Ed.]

[13] [In the United States Quadroon is the offspring of a mulatto and a white person, and has one-fourth black blood. An Octoroon is the offsprrng of a Quadroon and a white person, and consequently has one-eighth black blood, The Quintroon has, according to Webster’s Dictionary, only one-thirty-second part of Negro blood. See, also, Ogilvie's Imperial Dictionary of the English Language, London, 1882. – Am. Ed.]