A. LOOKING NORTH FROM 9,000 FEET ELEVATION. THE SUMMIT IS 5 MILES DISTANT. DESOLATE, INHOSPITABLE IN THE EXTREME, ARE THE PUMICE FIELDS ABOVE TIMBER LINE.

OF THE YEAR, TREES AT THE TIMBER LINE HAVE A HARD, SLOW STRUGGLE FOR LIFE.

MOUNT RAINIER INSECTS. (ALL FIGURES OF PLATE 8 MAGNIFIED APPROXIMATELY Two DIAMETERS, EXCEPT FIGURE 9, WHICH IS ALMOST NATURAL SIZE.)

1. Arctophila flagrans, a mountain syrphid.

2. Arctophila harveyi, previously known only from British Columbia.

3. Anthrax agrippina, a robust bee fly.

4. "Echinomyia algens," i. e., Rhachogaster kermodei, a cutworm parasite. Note the torn wings. 5. Cincindela depressula, a mountain tiger beetle.

6. Thevenimyia (Eclimus) harrisi, the slender bee fly of the ghost trees.

7. Caliprobola pulcher, a metallic bronzed syrphid.

8. Cyrtopogon dasyllis, a mountain robber fly.

9. Urocerus cyaneus, the steel-blue horntail wasp.

10. Sarcophaga exuberans, a "flesh fly," parasitic on insects.

11. Egeria rutilans, a wasplike clearwing moth.

12. Pachyla ar mata, a flower-loving longhorn beetle.

1. Sericomyia chalcopyga, the commonest mountain syrphid. X 2.3.

2. Asemoplus rainierensis, a short-winged grasshopper found near the timber line. X 1.8.

3. Pocota grandis, one of the finest of mountain syrphids. X 2.

4. Papilio Zolicaon, a swallowtail butterfly. Natural size.

5. Carabus tædatus, a caterpillar-hunting beetle. X 1.8.

6. Anabrus simpler var. maculosus, the fubber cricket that lives near timber line. Natural size.

422--9

THE SCIENCE OF MAN: ITS NEEDS AND ITS

PROSPECTS.1

By KARL PEARSON, F. R. S.

Anthropology-the understanding of man-should be, if Pierre Charron were correct, the true science and the true study of mankind.2 We might anticipate that in our days-in this era of science-anthropology in its broadest sense would occupy the same exalted position that theology occupied in the Middle Ages. We should hail it "Queen of the sciences," the crowning study of the academic curriculum. Why is it that we are section H and not section A? If the answer be given that such is the result of historic evolution, can we still be satisfied with the position that anthropology at present takes up in our British universities and in our learned societies? Have our universities, one and all, anthropological institutes well filled with enthusiastic students, and are there brilliant professors and lecturers teaching them not only to understand man's past, but to use that knowledge to forward his future? Have we men trained during a long life of study and research to represent our science in the arena, or do we largely trust to dilettanti-to retired civil servants, to untrained travelers or colonial medical men for our knowledge, and to the anatomist, the surgeon, or the archeologist for our teaching? Needless to say, that for the study of man we require the better part of many sciences; we must draw for contributions on medicine, on zoology, on anatomy, or archeology, on folk-lore and travel-lore, nay, on history, psychology, geology, and many other branches of knowledge. But a hotchpotch of the facts of these sciences does not create anthropology. The true anthropologist is not the man who has merely a wide knowledge of the conclusions of other sciences, he is the man who grasps their bearing on mankind and throws light on the past and present factors of human evolution from that knowledge.

1 Presidential address to Section H of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Cardiff, 1920. Reprinted by permission of the British Association.

"La vraye science et le vray estude de l'homme c'est l'Homme." Pierre Charron, De la Sagesse, Préface du Premier Livre, 1601. Pope, with his "The proper study of mankind is Man," 1733, was, as we might anticipate, only a plagiarist.