Изображения страниц

(Bloch), the leading Protestant theologian in Hungary, Bishop Hellmuth of Huron (1820), the sole living Bishop of Hebrew blood, and D. Norsa* (1807), are other names. Chess is nowadays a profession, and mostly a Jewish profession; the two chief living names, W. Steinitz (1837) and J. H. Zukertort (1842), being those of Jews, as well as two masters of the past, A. Alexandre (17661850) and J. G. Löwenthal (1810-76). Education gives us the names of D. Friedlander (1750-1834) and Levi-Alvares (17941870).

COMMERCE AND PHILANTHROPY have been usually combined among Jewish celebrities. This is certainly the case with S. Heine (1766– 1844), the Rothschilds, Meyer (1743-1812), Lionel (1808-81), Edmond (1826), and James (1844-84), Sir M. Montefiore (1784-1885); the Pereires, Edmond (1800-75), and James (1806-80), L. R. Bischoffsheim (1800-84), J. Mires (1809-71), and J. Truro (17751854). These all obtained fortunes in finance. Of great masters of industry there is only one important name, that of B. H. Strousberg* (1828-84), the "Railway King" of Germany; the only other name is that of J. Alexandre (1804-76), a pianoforte manufacturer.

SALONS of importance have been presided over by brilliant Jewesses. The three chief centres of cultured life at Berlin at the beginning of this century were the salons of Rahel von Ense (17711833), Dorothea Mendelssohn-Schlegel* (1769-1839), and Henriette Herz (1764-1847).1

TRAVEL may conclude our new list with the names of Joseph Wolff* (1795–62), the eccentric; +W. G. Palgrave (1826), who opened up Central Arabia; A. Vambéry* (1832), the leading authority on Central Asia; †Sir F. H. Goldsmid, the Persian traveller; G. Oppert (1836); and N. Davis* (1812-82), the explorer of Carthage, if he were a Jew.

The above list does not claim or aim to be exhaustive. It only professes to contain the names of such Jews as have found their way into dictionaries of general biography. By restricting myself thus I have been obliged to insert many names whom I should not myself have thought worthy of mention, and to omit others who appear to me to have been undeservedly overlooked. I have given a few of the latter in footnotes, but have not referred to the many young men of promise now springing up, as my comparison is mainly limited to those over fifty, at which age men first obtain admission to the rolls of fame. On the whole, I do not find many important omissions; even those of the third class rarely fail to attract the attention of the experts in celebrity. I have been obliged to restrict myself in this way as the immediate object of the compilation has been to find materials for discussing the much vexed question as to the relative ability of Jews. To compare them with others we must take the same sources as those from which the names of celebrities generally are taken. For the same purpose it 1 One of the most important English salons was that of Countess Waldegrave, Braham's daughter, while the gifted family of Raffalovitch holds one of the chief salons in Paris at the present day (Times, Sept. 15, 1885).

has been necessary for me to undertake the invidious task of classing the names in four classes corresponding to the four highest classes fixed with mathemetical accuracy by Mr. Galton in his "Hereditary Genius," 1869 (p. 34). The fourth class cannot be complete, many names coming by accident into the dictionaries. For purposes of comparison the names only of those in black letters, capitals, or italics are to be considered, though the remainder are useful as means of judging the subjects of Jewish pre-eminence. Even the third class are reckoned by Mr. Galton to reach the average of an English judge of the best times of the Bench, and every one of the Jewish celebrities are far indeed above the average of those men who gain the ordinary prizes of life.


Illustrious Europeans (1785-1885).

I have made the following estimate of the ability of the chief civilised nations founded on the number of first class men they have produced during the century 1785-1885, as compared with the number of males who have reached fifty during that period. The results are of course precarious owing to the difficulty of deciding upon the names of first class men. But they agree sufficiently with popular impressions to deserve record. The validity of the results would be much increased if we could obtain lists of the second class men.

The third column of figures give the relative order of ability of the different nationalities. The discrepancy between the table of the general ability of the different countries, and that in the note on page 359, giving that of the Jewish ability in the same, indicates the influence of the social environment in making talent "kinetic " instead of "potential." The English names and numbers may be taken as confirming Mr. Galton's estimate of one genius per million males over fifty. At first sight there seem to be nearly double that number. But G. Eliot was a woman, Pitt and Byron never reached fifty, Bentham and Faraday are doubtful (though this is counterbalanced by the claims of Shelley and Turner), and Darwin is a man of many millions. So that there have been but 12 certain geniuses among 10 or 11 millions over fifty. I would also call attention to the remarkable groupings of the births of the Englishmen three clustered around the date 1770 (Wellington 1769, Wordsworth 1770, Scott 1771), five round 1810 (Darwin, Gladstone, and Tennyson all 1809, Thackeray 1811, Dickens 1812), and three round 1820 (Ruskin 1819, Eliot and Spencer 1820). Judging from the middle cluster, it would seem that a nation gives birth to its greatest men when in the throes of its severest struggles. There is, as it were, an incarnation of the Zeitgeist. It would be interesting to see if the next batch of European genius has any similar relation to the year 1848.



2 c

[blocks in formation]



[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]




[blocks in formation]


Kossuth (?), Mozart.
Beaconsfield, Bentham
(?), Byron, Carlyle, Dar-
win, Dickens, G. Eliot,
Faraday (?), Gladstone,
Macaulay, Pitt, Ruskin,
Scott, Spencer, Tenny-
son, Thackeray, Words-

Comte, Dumas père (?),
Gambetta, V. Hugo,
Laplace, Lesseps (?),
Mirabeau, Napoleon,
Pasteur, Renan, Robes-
pierre, G. Sand, Thiers.
Beethoven, Bismarck,
Fichte, Gauss, Goethe,
Grimm, Hegel, Heine,
Helmholtz, Lassalle,
Mendelssohn, Moltke,
Mommsen, Schiller,
Schopenhauer, Schu-
bert, Stein, Wagner.
Garibaldi, Leopardi (?),

Skobelef (?), Turgenief.
Emerson (?), Washing-
ton (?).

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Fig. 1 is only intended to illustrate the fact that closed curves on the same side of the same base, and containing the same area, must cross one another. This principle applied to the curves in fig. 2 enables us to say that if there are more Scotchmen and Jews in the extreme classes, there must be less of them in the middle or mediocre class. Fig. 2 gives, as it were, the shape of the boundary walls of a million Englishmen, Scotchmen, and Jews penned into sixteen classes, ranging regularly in order of ability. The horizontal dotted lines give the different classes, named symmetrically from the centre line A, B, C, &c., towards one end, a, b, c towards the other. It is assumed that a class indicated by a small letter is of the same size as that represented by a large letter. The numbers



J.Jacobs, del.

Drawn out of scale to preserve clearness at extremities.

Dark parts obtained from observation; the rest by interpolation.




JP&WREmslie, lith.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »