moreover, augmented by the insertion of numerous illustrations. These are carefully combined in Plates to avoid the loss of room occasioned by scattering single cuts separately over the pages; and the whole printing is executed in a very compact style; so that, notwithstanding all the additions and the accession of several hundred cuts, the sensible bulk of the volume is scarcely increased."

EDITOR.

ARTICLE X.

LITERARY NOTICES.

1. Crania Americana; or, a Comparative View of the Skulls of various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America, &c. By SAMUEL GEORGE MORTON, M. D. 1839.

EVERY thing relating to the aborigines of this country is worthy of regard; and the attention of men of science seems to be more productively turned to this subject just at the present time than at any former period. The appearance, within so short a time, of Mr. Delafield's work on American Antiquities,* and of Dr. Morton's Crania Americana, speaks much for the advance of general interest in the subject. The object of each of these works may be said to be essentially the same, viz., to determine to what people belongs the origin of those numerous remains, in the shape of earth works, and stone works of cyclopean structure, scattered over parts of North and South America. Dr. Morton does not indeed carry his researches so far as to determine, like Mr. Delafield, whether or not the builders of the wondrous remains of Tiaguanica and Titicaca were of the self-same race and kindred with those who shaped the pyramids of Egypt. He confines himself to aiming to prove, chiefly by the aid of a comparison of the skulls of the parties, certain points as to the connection, in race and origin, of the present and former possessors of the soil, not of European origin, and as to the origin of the works of man's hands which still

exist.

Before passing to notice Dr. Morton's theory, and the kind and value of the proofs brought forward in support of it, we must pay the just tribute of our admiration to the execution of the work. In these degen. erate days of duodecimos and diamond editions, a goodly folio of the size before us is indeed a rarity;-a rarity which gladdens the eyes of all lovers of the good old solid literature which abounded and was esteemed two centuries ago more than, alas, it now generally is. The

* Reviewed in Vol. IV, p. 555, of this Review.

illustrations to Dr. Morton's work, in the form of seventy lithographic plates, are fit subjects for our highest praise, and are some of the best specimens with which we are acquainted. The lithographic process was rightly chosen for the purpose. The finest engraving would hardly have been so real or true. There are few objects more difficult to give a just idea of by drawing than human skulls, and the shading of the chalk is more effectual than the nicest touches of the graver. The majority of the plates are beautiful. A few, the earlier work of the artist we doubt not, are of inferior workmanship. The truth of the drawings we can in general feel assured of. As a collection of authentic monuments of this kind alone, the work would be of high value. Its literary merits we must examine more at length.

The theory which it is the object of Dr. Morton to establish,-or perhaps we should rather say, the conclusions to which his researches have led him, are the following:

"1st. That the American race differs essentially from all others, not excepting the Mongolian: nor do the feeble analogies of language, and the more obvious ones in civil and religious institutions and the arts, denote any thing beyond casual or colonial communication with the Asiatic nations; and even these analogies may perhaps be accounted for, as Humboldt has suggested, in the mere coincidence arising from similar wants and impulses, in nations inhabiting similar latitudes.

"2d. That the American nations, excepting the Polar tribes, are of one race and one species, but of two great families," elsewhere named by him the American family and the Toltecan family," which resemble each other in physical, but differ in intellectual character.

"3d. That the cranial remains discovered in the mounds, from Peru to Wisconsin, belong to the same race, and probably to the Toltecan family."

We shall pass over the first point without remark.

Dr. Morton's second point is, it will be seen, in direct opposition to the usual opinion, and, what is more to the point, to the view sought to be established by Mr. Delafield, who asserts (see Vol. IV, of this Review, p. 579) that the mound builders "could not have been the existing Indian race or their ancestors; nor can any other race be found on the continent, which can be supposed to have done the work in question."

Though Dr. Morton, however, thus asserts a proposition directly contrary to that of Mr. Delafield, yet, as we shall presently show, he does in truth bring together many facts which directly support Mr. Delafield's view. We leave these inconsistencies out of view for the present, and will speak merely of the letter of Dr. Morton's

conclusions.

In support of this point, then, of the identity of the American races, Dr. Morton brings a long and very interesting array of facts, in the way of comparisons of the skulls of the (recent) Mexican and Peruvian tribes with those of the other tribes of North and South America. He shows, we think, very satisfactorily, that the same type

VOL. V.-NO. XVIII.

39

of skull prevails throughout the specimens of each; and, showing at the same time, as he does, the difference which exists between this type and that of the nations of Europe and Asia and Africa, he establishes it with a strength of proof which we think unanswerable, that the Peruvian and Mexican (recent) civilized tribes and the other wilder tribes of North and South America are identical in race, though so widely differing from each other, in the extremes of barbarism and of cultivation at which they were first found by Europeans.

We pass on to the third point. In reference to which we will quote our author's own words as to the geographical distribution, and the general character of the mounds or earth works. On page 217, he says, "In North America there are very few mounds east of the Alleghany mountains. They are extremely infrequent, if not wholly deficient, throughout the New England States, New York, Pennsylvania and other States as far as South Carolina where they are common in the interior. The latter remark is also applicable to Georgia and Florida, and all the country which skirts the Gulf of Mexico. Throughout the valley of the Mississippi they are very numerous.

**

*

*

They abound much farther north, and are seen as far as the vicinity of Lake Travers, in lat. 46°, which is probably the northern limits of these remains. They are observed up the Ohio and its tributaries to the base of the Alleghanies; diminish in frequency westward of the Mississippi, and are not seen beyond the Rocky Mountains. To the south they are common in Arkansas, and in Mexico are vastly numerous. In Peru and its ancient dependencies, they are also seen in great number, and even as far south as the country of the Araucos, in Chili. East of the Andes they are rarely seen; and Humboldt is of opinion that there is not a tumulus in all Guiana. The uses of these structures were various, as will appear from the position they occupy, and the articles contained in them; nor can there be a question that they were mainly designed for receptacles for the dead.” On page 219, he asks, “Of what race were the people who constructed these tumuli?" By turning to page 228, &c., the answer will be found. We extract sufficient to render that answer clear in this place. "The preceding illustrations embrace eight genuine mound skulls, and no one, I think, can examine them, without being struck with their resemblance to the other crania figured in this work; and, when we recur to the geographical distribution of the mounds, as already noticed, they will be found scattered over those parts of both Americas which were inhabited by the demi-civilized nations embraced in the Toltecan family. Wherever these tumuli are found, whether in Peru, Mexico, Florida, or the Valley of the Mississippi, they are observed to be similarly constructed, and to contain analogous remains." In another page he makes some remarks which support, as also do those just quoted, Mr. Delafield's view of the similarity in origin of the earth and other works of antiquity scattered over the country north and south. "That the fortifications," says

*

*

he, page 229, "and other ancient structures of our western country belong to the same era and people with the mounds, seems probable from the circumstance of their almost constantly occurring together; nor is there any thing in the mode of their construction that points to a higher civilization. In fact, a careful review of all the circumstances will lead almost unavoidably to the conclusion, that the ancient mounds of America owe their origin to the various branches of the great Toltecan family, which was spread, as we have seen, from the confines of Chili to the shores of Lake Superior. * That they once occupied Florida and the Valley of the Mississippi, there can be no doubt." This latter view is curiously confirmed by some of the narratives of the early Scandinavian voyages to this country; and incidental confirmations of this kind are valuable.

So far, then, for the views of Dr. Morton. In the last point it will be seen that he entirely agrees with Mr. Delafield in so far as the identity in origin of the works are concerned, differing from him as to the race of workers. His own position does not, however, as we shall see, go uncontradicted by himself in another part of his work. The proof brought forward in this way, of skulls, is, however, pretty complete in so far as the recent tribes are concerned. We must next turn to the inconsistencies existing in Dr. Morton's book, and which, unfortunately, refer to the most important and interesting part of the whole subject. They relate entirely to the Toltecan race, and to the origin of those very works which excite the greatest interest and curiosity.

On the one hand, we see it represented that all the mounds and other structures, cyclopean as well as otherwise, were built by the Toltecans; who, it is sufficiently and satisfactorily proved, extended at different times "from the confines of Chili to the shores of Lake Superior," and who are as satisfactorily proved to be of the same race as the more savage tribes of North and South America. On the other hand, we see it represented and proved that there was a race in Peru more ancient than these Toltecans, and to which ancient race is undoubtedly to be ascribed the building of those cyclopean works which yet exist there. What to make of these contradictions we know not. It is obvious that they upset the views expressed by the author completely; and that the facts they contain suggest totally different views. It appears to us as if the work had been composed in pieces, at different times, and that thus the mass of facts was, in great measure, forgotten before the last pages, containing the author's conclusions, were written. We give Dr. Morton every praise for research and accumulation of facts of interest and importance. We regret to have to remark the defect pointed out.

On the whole, we consider the literary portion of the work as valuable, though it might have been improved by a more careful and methodical examination and comparison of the facts brought together; the collection of which must have been the work of much time and reading on the author's part.

S.

2. An Historical Presentation of Augustinism and Pelagianism from the Original Sources. By G. F. WIGGERS, D. D., Professor of Theology in the University of Rostock, &c. Translated from the German, with Notes and Additions, by Rev. RALPH EMERSON, Prof. of Eccl. Hist. in the Theol. Sem., Andover, Mass. 8vo. pp. 383. Andover. Published by Gould, Newman & Saxton. New York. 1840.

As we have in a former number reviewed the original work, and expressed our views of its character, it only remains for us now to notice the translation. It is a fortunate circumstance that the translator of this historical production is himself an ecclesiastical historian. None but such can ordinarily be expected to sympathize with the author and enter fully into all his views, or even comprehend his words. Few others would be likely to bestow upon the subject the amount of labor requisite to give special value to a translation. The entire contents of a work to be transferred into another language needs to be analyzed, understood and felt, no less by the translator than by the original author. Omissions, oversights, errors, in short, all imperfections ought to be pointed out and remedied by the translator. We are happy to perceive that Prof. Emerson well understood the nature of his undertaking, and that he has been indefatigable in his efforts to put the last finish upon this part of his work. The book has been Anglicised in more respects than one. Its general appearance and form have been improved; the Latin quotations have been revised, often enlarged, and generally translated; the wants of the American student have been particularly regarded in the notes, and the hand of the theologian and scholar, as well as historian, is every where visible.

The version itself is as accurate and unblemished in regard to thought and style as could reasonably be expected. It is no easy matter for one who has not learned a language by social intercourse and by long and daily practice, to translate a whole volume without falling into any errors. Many expressions occur in all authors whose import cannot be made out on mere grammatical principles. There must be something like an inward sense by which the genius of a language can be felt, something that can never be embodied in a lexicon or grammar. Nearly all the recent translations from the German betray more or less of deficiency in regard to the finer turns of expression, and the sense of idiomatic phrases, to say nothing of allusions to current opinions and events. Prof. Emerson stands on a level with others in this respect. There are, in the course of the volume, several inaccuracies; and so there are in almost every American translation from the German which we have examined. In pointing out the most important of these errors, our object is not to bring together under one view all the imperfections scattered through the whole work, and thus make out a long catalogue of sins. Such a procedure would be alike disingenuous and deceptive. To guard entirely against leaving such an impression on the mind of any reader, we would distinctly state, that these inaccuracies, when compared with the extent of the work and the difficulties growing out of the nature of the case, bear a very small proportion to the whole. Believing that a large number of our readers will procure this valuable, and to a minister almost indispensable, book, without having the means