k 



MONOGENY FEBSUS POLYGENY. 303 



istics. This, as well as the complicated relations of the 

 mixture of races, and the various forms of hybrids, is 

 the great difficulty lying in the way of tracing the 

 human pedigree in its individual branches, species, races, 

 varieties, etc. 



In spite of these great and serious difficulties, we cannot 

 here refrain from taking one more cursory glance at the 

 ramification of the human pedigree, and at the same time 

 considering, from the point of view of the theory of descent, 

 the much discussed question of the monophyletic or poly- 

 phyletic origin of the human race, and its species or races. 

 As is well known, two great parties have for a long time 

 been at war with each other upon this question; the 

 monophylists (or monogenists) maintain the unity of origin 

 and the blood relationship of all races of men. The poly- 

 phylists (or polygenists), on the other hand, are of opinion 

 that the difierent races of men are of independent origin. 

 According to our previous genealogical investigations we 

 cannot doubt that, at least in a wide sense, the monophy- 

 letic opinion is the right one. For even supposiug that the 

 transmutation of Man-like Apes into Men had taken place 

 several times, yet those Apes themselves would again be 

 allied by the one pedigree common to the whole order of 

 Apes, The question therefore would always be merely 

 about a nearer or remoter degree of blood relationship. In 

 a narrower sense, on the other hand, the poljrphylist's 

 opinion would probably be right, inasmuch as the different 

 primaeval languages have developed quite independently of 

 one another. Hence, if the origin of an articulate language 

 is considered as the real and principal act of humanification, 

 and the species of the human race are distinguished accord- 



