the animal world in the case of the different species of a genus, but only in the case of varieties of a species.'

In the matter of size also, as Burmeister observes,2 there is no essential difference. "The northern nations are no doubt smaller on the whole than those of the temperate zones, but there are no real nations of dwarfs. Five feet, a height which is not exceeded by many individuals in Europe, is the minimum, below which a whole nation does not easily fall; while, on the other hand, six feet is the maximum height, which whole nations rarely exceed, although everywhere there are individuals taller than this. The height of the Patagonians stands hardly in the ratio of 3 to 2 to that of the Eskimos, while amongst the different varieties of the dog we find the ratio of 1 to 12, and amongst the varieties of the tame bull, 1 to 6.3

The most striking differences between the different races of men lie in the colour of the skin, the character of the hair, and the form of the skull and the pelvis.

1 Delitzsch, Genesis, p. 241. Cf. Prichard, i. 151 seq. Perty, Grundzüge, p. 19. Waitz, Anthropol. i. 124. Quatrefages, Rapport, p. 343. Rauch, Die Einheit, p. 50.

2 Geschichte der Schöpfung. p. 506, 7th ed. p. 622. Cf. Strücker, Ueber Zwerg und Riesenvolker. See Im neuen Reich, 1879, ii. 153.

3 Peschel, Volkerkunde, p. 82: "The average height of man according to the data now before me is 1.60 of a metre ; but this average has been obtained from many very different single instances. If all men were arranged according to their height, we should have a series whose separate members would differ only 1-100th of a millimetre. But in this series men of the same race would not always be together. Not all Patagonians are almost 2, nor all Bushmen 1.18 metres high (Peschel's highest measurements are, op. cit. p. 84: Patagonians 1:80, Polynesians 1:93, the lowest of the Bushmen 1:30 metres). Many of the Cuirassiers and Imperial Guards would be among the first, and the Lapps in Northern Europe and Andaman Islanders in the Gulf of Bengal would be among the last. We find nothing like this in any kind of animal which includes many species; the races of domestic animals would furnish the only analogy to it. Quatrefages, Hist. de L'homme, iv. p. 20; Rapport, p. 280.

The different races have been grouped according to colour and form of skull.1 Blumenbach, who on this subject is the most eminent of the older savants (1752-1840), divides them into five races, which he calls the Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, American, and Malay. The most striking characteristic of these five races is the colour of the skin; the Caucasians are white, the Mongols yellow, the Ethiopians black, the Americans a coppery red, and the Malays brown. And yet Peschel says, "If we had other more marked characteristics for distinguishing races, no one would venture to call the colour of the skin such, for it varies both in shade and in colour, not only in every tribe, but often in the individuals of a single tribe."

As to the hair, its colour varies so much that it can hardly be considered as distinguishing the races; the character of the hair is more important, and some modern anthropologists have laid great stress on this. We can distinguish a smooth or straight, a curly or wavy, a frizzy or a tufted growth of the hair. And the form of the transverse section of the single hairs differs; it is sometimes round, sometimes elliptical. If the largest diameter of the transverse section of the hair is 100, the smallest diameter sinks from 95 in the South Americans to 34 in the Papuans in New Guinea. The tendency to curliness and to frizziness increases with the increased flatness of the hair, with which greater fineness is also usually connected. Generally speaking the Americans and Mongols have round straight hair, the Europeans and Semitic races

1 Cf. Waitz, Anthropologie, i. 260. Zöckler, Op. cit. p. 53.
2 Volkerkunde, p. 93.

curly, and the negroes and Australians frizzy hair; the tufted growth of hair, in which the hairs are collected into separate tufts, is found amongst the Papuans, the Hottentots, the Bushmen, and a few other African tribes. But here also we find gradual transitions which make a sharp separation of the races impossible. We find also important differences in the growth of the beard and of the hair on other parts of the body; but these are not distinct and invariable enough to make them a distinguishing mark of race, at any rate it is not right to say, as Hæckel does,' that after speech the nature of the growth of the hair may be made the basis of classification of the human race.

2

Blumenbach in his classification has laid special stress on the form of the skull. Before his time the Dutchman Peter Camper (+1789) had made an ingenious rule for this, which depends on the so-called facial angle. In order to get this you look at the skull from the side, and first draw a line from the opening of the ear to the base of the nose, then a second line from the most prominent part of the brow to the outer edge of the upper jawbone where the roots of the teeth are: the angle at which these two lines intersect each other is the facial angle. The minimum of the facial angle, which only unhealthy forms, such as cretins, do not reach, is, according to Burmeister, 75 degrees. At 70 degrees, according to others at much fewer, the ape type begins, and henceforth the angle diminishes through all possible degrees amongst the mammals.

3

'Nat. Schöpfungsgeschichte, p. 602. Peschel, Volkerkunde, p. 96. 2 Prichard, i. 279. Wiseman, On the Connection, etc. i. 168. Geschichte der Schöpfung, p. 510 (7th ed. 627).

VOL. II.

N

In regularly formed human skulls the facial angle varies according to usual calculations between 72 and 85 degrees; the larger it is the nobler and finer is the shape of the skull all through. In Greek statues in which we admire the ideal of the human form, the facial angle is 90 degrees, just as if the old masters had wished to express by this means the highest spiritual perfection of their gods and heroes. An increase above 90 degrees becomes ugly, and the healthy human head assumes the form of one with water on the brain. Blumenbach said that the facial angle was an inadequate characteristic in the classification of races, and modern anthropologists have either quite given up this criterion or essentially modified it, and have also proved that the figures usually given for the facial angle are incorrect.1

Blumenbach distinguishes three principal forms of the skull. The oval skull is broadest at the top of the forehead, it has a spherical crown, the back of the head is arched towards the top, the forehead is high and straight, the cheek-bones small, the jaw small and straight, the chin small. In the square-faced or pyramidal skull the contour of the face is on the whole round, the forehead broad and narrow, the cheek-bones prominent, the chin broad and straight, the crown of the head rather flat, the back of the head flat, and the greatest diameter of the skull is at the level of the

1 Aeby, Die Schädelformen, p. 81. H. v. Ihering, "Ueber das Wesen der Prognathie," Archiv für Anthropologie, v. 379. According to Aeby the facial angle in the Pithecus Satyrus and Gorilla is 39, in the Hylobates 54, in the Cebus 60. In man he gives it as 68-80. In none of the Europeans examined by him did the facial angle reach to 80 degrees (in a Swede it was 71, in a Turk, Dane, Jew, Dutchman, Lapp 75, in a Russian and a Cossack 76, in an Australian 77, in a Hindoo and a Greek 78, in a Bugi 80), and yet this is often given as the minimum for Europeans.

cheek-bones or the ear. The elongated skull has a small face, the greatest diameter of which is through the cheek-bones, a small narrow receding forehead, a projecting jaw, a receding chin, a narrow, almost angular crown, and the back of the head projecting.1 According to Blumenbach, the first form charcterizes the Caucasian races, the second the Mongolian, the third the Ethiopians. He thinks that in this respect the Americans and Malays are varieties holding a middle position between the Caucasian race on the one hand, and the Mongolian and Ethiopian on the other.

2

In this classification of skulls, stress is laid on the shape of the face and the inclination of the forehead. A later anthropologist, the Swede Anders Retzius, thought it expedient to lay more stress on the actual cranium. He says that the diversity in the outward shape of skulls is produced principally by the development of one of the three lobes of the cerebrum. The length of the skull at the back, and its narrow shape, which characterize the negro races, depend partly on the smaller size of the cerebrum, partly on the striking smallness of its middle lobe. This is very large in pyramidal (Mongolian) skulls; on the other hand, the posterior lobe, which in the negroes is the most developed, is extremely small. In the oval (Caucasian) skulls the anterior lobe of the cerebrum predominates, and by this means the forehead is more rounded, and a general development of the brain takes place, which causes the anterior lobe to project farther than is the

p. 626).

1 Burmeister, Geschichte der Schöpfung, p. 509 (7th ed. 2 Cf. Burmeister, p. 510 (p. 627). A. Wagner, Gesch. der Urwelt, ii. 32. Ausland, 1866, p. 686. Vogt, Vorlesungen, i. 57.