EARLY HISTORY OF MANKIND. 



153 



?n the chapter before the last According to that theory, 

 we should expect man to have originated where the high- 

 est species of the quadrumana are to be found. Now these 

 are unquestionably found in the Indian Archipelago. 



After all, it may be regarded as still an open question, 

 whether mankind is of one or many origins. The first 

 human generation may have consisted of many pairs, 

 though situated at one place, and these may have been 

 considerably different from each other in external charac- 

 ters. And we are equally bound to admit, though this 

 does not as yet seem to have occurred to any other specu- 

 lator, that there may have been different lines and 

 sources of origination, geographically apart, but which 

 all resulted uniformly in the production of a being one 

 in species, although variously marked. 



It has of late years been a favorite notion with many, 

 that the human race was at first in a highly civilized 

 state, and that barbarism was a second condition. This 

 idea probably took its origin in a wish to support certain 

 interpretations of the Mosaic record, and it has never yet 

 been propounded by any writer who seemed to have a 

 due sense of the value of science in this class of inves- 

 tigations. The principal argument for it is, that we see 

 many*examples of nations falling away from civilization 

 into barbarism, while in some regions of the earth, the 

 history of which we do not clearly know, there are re- 

 mains of works of art far superior to any which the pres- 

 ent unenlightened inhabitants could have produced. 

 It is to be readily admitted that such decadences are 

 common; but do they necessarily prove that there has 

 been anything like a regular and constant decline into the 

 present state, from a state more generally refined ? May 

 not these be only instances of local failures and suppres- 

 sions of the principle of civilization, where it had begun 

 to take root amongst a people generally barbarous ? It is> 

 at least, as legitimate to draw this inference from the 

 facts which are known. But it is also alleged that we 

 know of no such thing as civilization being ever self- 

 originated. It is always seen to be imparted from one 

 people to another. Hence, of course, we must infer that 

 civilization at the first could only have been of super- 

 natural origin. This argument appears to be founded on 

 false premises, for civilization does sometimes rise in a 

 Banner clearly independent amongst a horde of people 



