mankind were associated into large communities, and in cities ;* and religion, the arts, and sciences were cultivated, according to the most ancient monuments and records of the oldest nations. The Egyptians will sufficiently illustrate the perfection which had thus been attained, so recently after the flood. Eighteen hundred years before our era, they were acquainted with the manufacture of linen, constructed cabinet-ware with great taste and elegance, were skilled in the working and smelting of gold, silver, copper, lead, brass and iron, and in other metallurgic arts, and of necessity possessed an acquaintance with the phenomena and principles of chemistry. They embalmed the bodies of the dead, and manufactured various liquors. They formed artificial gems of exquisite beauty,† and their pigments were of great lustre and permanence. "They were not only acquainted with glass, but excelled in staining it of divers hues, and their ingenuity had pointed out to them the mode of carrying devices of various colors directly through the fused substance." Their work in pottery and porcelain was brought to a high degree of perfection, and their vases display forms of the most graceful elegance. In mensuration, geometry and astronomy they were well versed, and their architectural productions still excite the astonishment of the world. In music 'they were acquainted with the triple symphony--the harmony of instruments--of voices-and of voices and instruments." In the days of Joseph their commerce extended to distant nations, and their civil and religious institutions were firmly established. The existence of castes alone, is an important evidence of early

* In the days of Moses, the Canaanites dwelt in great walled cities, "fenced up to heaven." Deut. 9: 1.

† Seneca, epist. xc.

Pliny Nat. Hist. 1. 26, 27.

**

civilization, as it is predicated upon a settled state of public polity, and a uniform system of labor. That which is observed of the Egyptians in these early ages, is applicable in a great measure to the Chaldeans, Etrurians, Hindoos, Chinese, Mexicans and Peruvians, and other primitive nations, whose traditions generally assign the arts to an antediluvian, or to an heroic or fabulous origin, or agree that they were existing at a period of unexplored antiquity. With these evidences of very early civilization among the most ancient nations, are we justified in regarding the rude and ignorant tribes of the earth, as the inheritors of an original barbarism, common to all mankind before the separation? The Hindoo traditions declare barbarians to be outcasts, who have been driven from society, or who have wandered away from their parent stock, and subsequently become degraded; and surely if the civilization, existing so shortly after the deluge, was general before the dispersion, such is the only rational conclusion.

This idea is supported also by a sense of justice, which on the contrary supposition, is shocked at an apparent unequal distribution, among different people, of those faculties efficient towards advancement. On the other hand, the opposing opinion is based on an assumption, that mankind in a state of moral darkness are capable of originating and perfecting their own civilization,—a doctrine unsupported by a single historical fact, and contrary to the course of events, in all antiquity. The assertion that mankind "always advance and never recede, is equally untrue in philosophy and experience." At this epoch, as we are too prone, on the one hand, to convert conclusions founded upon the course of the empires of antiquity, into

* Vide Wilkinson, passim.

predictions applicable to modern times, and to teach the pecessary and natural, rise and decadence of nations, so on the other hand, from the modern conviction of the sure, and steady, and onward course of the human mind for the future, it is usual to imagine that the converse is true, and as progression must have had a commencement, to suppose a period when barbarism was the common and primary condition of our race. Both speculations are perhaps equally unsound, and certainly the comparison is unjust, for it is based upon a fictitious analogy between different and discrepant states of humanity. From the Christian era, or rather from that time, when the civilization of Greece, and of Rome had been finally buried in a common grave, when the light of science and literature was extinguished, and the new and brighter light of a pure religion began to exert its power,-from that period when the vitality of the old pagan system became extinct, and even the fresh infusion of northern barbarism was ultimately subdued by the renovating influence of another code of morals, the human intellect has been advancing in a steady and unfaltering course of improvement. Before that epoch, however, it was far otherwise, and the historic parallel for many ages runs in a contrary direction. We then find knowledge transmitted from nation to nation-its first beams always coming from without, rather than originating from an internal impulse. Nations then were fitly emblemized by human life, and had their epochs of youth, manhood, old age, and death. Falling upon a new and perhaps vigorous soil, the germs of civilization were often developed into the most luxuriant growth, but the principle of life was wanting, and decay inevitably succeeded. Thus was it with Rome and Greece, the best illustrations of the ante-Christian

era; and as we recede into earlier ages, the same course of degradation is perceived, until we reach those remote times when the primitive nations existed, and are carried back to the period shortly subsequent to the flood, and even to the antediluvian ages. With these views, on turning to the uncivilized aboriginal tribes of both Americas, we shall be able to discern much that favors the idea of their descent from more enlightened progenitors,-faint traces of an ancient civilization not wholly obliterated by the lapse of time. And before entering upon the investigation, this position may be strengthened by the striking and appropriate language of Wm. Von Humboldt: "Neither has the important question yet been resolved,” he remarks, "whether that savage state, which even in America is found in various gradations, is to be looked upon as the dawning of a society about to rise, or whether it is not rather the fading remains of one, sinking amidst storms, overthrown and shattered by overwhelming catastrophes. To me the latter supposition seems to be nearer the truth than the former."

II. Common origin of the aborigines. If the idea just advanced, in relation to the civilization of the primitive nations in the early ages of the world, be correct; and if we are justified in asserting for many barbarous tribes, a descent from more cultivated ancestors; it becomes proper to examine whether there are any substantial grounds of distinction, indicating a difference of origin, between the two great divisions of American aborigines,--the barbarous, and the civilized.

1. Physical appearance. There are few points, upon which both travellers and naturalists have been more united in opinion, than the physical unity of the American race. No portion of the globe, of the same extent, presents so striking a unifor

mity in the physical conformation of its inhabitants; and, without excepting those varieties which may have arisen from climate and peculiar modes of life, all the aborigines of both Americas, barbarous or cultivated, in their features, color, and other characteristic indications, exhibit the clearest evidence of belonging to the same great race of the human family. No clearly established traces of ancient intermixture with other varieties of mankind can be discovered; and this general resemblance, therefore, besides proving the common origin of all the tribes, tends also to establish, that up to the era of the discovery, none but the Red race had occupied our continent.

2. Language. It was an old and common error, to consider the residents of every Indian village as a distinct tribe; and such was the imperfect knowledge of their dialects, that this mistake was confirmed by the impression, that many languages, now ascertained to be nearly related, were wholly dissimilar. It is not intended to deny the great diversity, which really exists in this respect, nor to trace fanciful analogies between the languages of the various aboriginal nations. But the close and searching investigations, which have been made into the character of these languages, have demonstrated the important fact, that through them all, there may be traced a general unity of structure, and a close and positive similarity in grammatical forms. It was remarked, some years since, that in their construction, in the attributes, the verbs and numerals, a great analogy existed. Mr. Duponceau, in 1819, observed that a striking resemblance was perceptible between the forms of the languages of South and North America; that this analogy was common to all the languages; and that to this general principle of construction he had not been able "to find one single, well