Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

66

In conjunction with a number of more or less exhaustive investigations into certain of these characters for . . . the countries of Europe, such a general knowledge of the race-characteristics of the European nations has been obtained, that it has been considered possible to draw some general conclusions. Professor Ripley of Harvard University, and Dr. Deniker, of Paris, have been specially occupied with summarizing the general results of investigations in this department. The former gives three separate races called by him: "The Teutonic Race," "The Alpine Race," and The Mediterranean Race.'. . . Dr. Deniker, on the other hand, went further in his subdivision of races; besides the three named he added some others, but has on different occasions arrived at different results. In his last publication, however, in the Huxley Memorial Lecture of 1904, Dr. Deniker fixed the number of European races at six. . . . Until a thorough investigation has made matters clearer, it seems to me to be wisest only to admit of the existence of such races as have really been proved, and to leave the classification of the remainder to the future. The following may, however, be admitted as surely existing:

1. The Northern European Dolichocephalic, Blue-eyed, Tall Race (Anders Retzius' Dolichocephalic Germanic type), which latterly has been designated by several writers (Wilson and others) Homo Europaeus (the term Linnaeus used), and which is now often termed the Northern Race (La Race Nordique, Nordische Rasse).

2. The Middle-European Brachycephalic, Dark-haired, Dark-eyed, Short-statured Race, probably closely related to the similar population in the eastern portions of Europe (Anders Retzius' Slavonic and Rhaetian people). This race has been designated recently Homo Alpinus (Linnaeus' term); there may be some justification for this term in the fact of a large section of the race being resident in the Alpine regions of Southern and Central Europe. But it should not be forgotten that this race during the lapse of centuries has extended its habitat to a considerable part of France and even to a large portion of Central and Northern Germany. Linnaeus certainly did not mean this race by his term "Homo Alpinus,” a fact already stated above.

3. The South-European Dolichocephalic, Dark-haired, Dark-eyed, Shortstatured Race, called Homo Mediterraneus (Sergi, Ripley, Wilser, and others), which may possibly embrace variations of distinct character in the various Mediterranean countries.

To name only the first of these three races, Europaeus, as appears often to be the fashion nowadays, seems to be very strange, since the other two great races, too, have inhabited Europe from times immemorial, and it is by no means possible of proof that they originated in other continents and migrated into Europe subsequently. I consider, moreover, that it is an entirely incorrect use of the nomenclature established once

for all for zoology, to call these races "Homo Europaeus, "" "Homo Alpinus," "Homo Mediterraneus," as is so often done in modern anthropological literature. This leads to a confusion of our ideas about species. They can, of course, only be regarded as variations of one and the same species, Homo sapiens, and in reality only as sub-variations of a variety, viz., the so-called white race of men. It is unfortunate that the notions, species, variety, and race, have not been more definitely fixed in value as regards the races of mankind. The majority of anthropologists are probably of the same opinion as Linnaeus, that the living races of mankind at the present time are all to be referred to one species, Homo sapiens Lin., and that their varient representatives are to be regarded as varieties of the species, even though very weighty reasons might be alleged for regarding some of these variations as species themselves. This question has now lost much of its significance since the triumphs of the theory of descent, but it is of importance for systemology, and for the formation of terms. As regards the population of our own continent and the problems concerning them, it is of no great significance whether the white man, the European, is put down as a particular species or as a variety. But it is of real importance that its subsections should not be put down as separate species. For my own part, I am at present most inclined to agree with Linnaeus and Blumenbach in regarding the great racial groups of the human species as varieties, though it must be admitted that the Australian, the Negro, and the American differ very widely from the European. There are to be found, however, remarkable transitional (intermediary) forms to bridge the gulf between the peoples of Asia and Europe, and there also exist similar transitional forms uniting the people of Asia with those of America and a portion of Polynesia. But if the term variety is to be preserved for the various large race-groups, we require a suitable term for the sub-sections under Varietas It seems to me, therefore, to be indicated that these sub-sections of the varieties should be designated as sub-varieties or sub-races (race branches).

16. MEASUREMENTS OF MEN1

By J. DENIKER

STATURE

Of all the physical characters which serve to distinguish races, stature is perhaps that which has been regarded as eminently variable. Not only does stature change with age and sex, but it varies also under the influence of external agencies. These variations are unquestionable; but it must be remarked that they occur in a similar way in all races, and cannot exceed certain limits imposed by race.

...

The individual limits between which height varies are wide. It is generally admitted that the limits of height in the normal man may vary from 1.25 m. (4 ft. 1) to 1.99 m. (6 ft. 64). Below 1.25 m. begins a certain abnormal state often pathological, called Dwarfism. Above 2 m. we have a corresponding state called Giantism. Dwarfs may be only 38 cm. (15 in.) tall, like the little feminine dwarf Hilany Agyba of Sinai, and giants as high as 2.83 m. (9 ft. 5), like the Finn Caïanus. . . .

Extreme statures which are still called normal, those below 1.25 m. and above 1.99 m., are very rare. Even statures below 1.35 m. and above 1.90 m. are exceptions. Thus in the extensive statistics from the American Civil War, based on more than 300,000 subjects, but one giant (above 2 m.) was met with out of every 10,000 subjects examined, and hardly five individuals in 1000 were taller than 1.90 m. (6 ft. 3). Again, in the statistics of the Committee of the British Association, which cover 8,585 persons, only three individuals in a thousand were found taller than 1.90 m. Yet in these two cases populations of a very high stature (1.72 m. on the average) were being dealt with. If we turn to a population lower in stature, for instance the Italians, we find only one adult male who is 1.90 m. or more in height among each 7000 examined, according to the statistics of Pagliani. In the same way, statures under 1.35 m. (53 in.) are met with only once in every 100,000 cases among the men examined by the American commission; and not once among the 8,585 British. Even in a short statured population like the Italians only three such are

'Selected from pages 25 to 104 of J. Deniker, The Races of Man, London, 1901. Originally written in French. The order of the parts has been slightly rearranged to give greater coherence to the present extract, and the style of the translation has been somewhat freely handled; but no alterations or additions of substance have been made.

to be found in every 1000 males examined. We do not possess sufficient data to be able to affirm positively that these extreme statures are equally exceptional among every one of the peoples of the globe. But all we know leads us to suppose that they are exceptional, and that the limits of normal stature in man may therefore be set between 1.35 m. and 1.90 m. However, individual cases are much less important than averages of different peoples; that is to say, the height obtained by dividing the sum of the statures of the individuals by the number of individuals measured. On comparison of these averages, it becomes possible to form a clear idea of racial differences in bodily height.

I have brought together in a table the average statures of peoples from whom we have series of measurements of twenty-five or more individuals. . . . An examination of this table shows that the extreme averages of different populations fluctuate, in round numbers, from 1.38 m. (4 ft. 6) among the Negrillo Akka to 1.79 m. (5 ft. 102) among the Galloway Scots. But if we set aside the quite exceptional pigmy tribe of the Akka, as well as the Galloway Scots, and even the northern Scots in general (1.78 m.) who likewise form a group entirely apart, we find that the extreme limits of stature vary from 1465 mm. among the Negritos of the Philippines to 1746 mm. among the Scots as a whole. Speaking broadly, then, we may recognize statures of 1.46 m. (4 ft. 9%) and 1.75 m. (5 ft. 9) as the extremes of human racial averages. The medium between these extremes is 1.61 m.; but if we leave out of account the rather exceptional Negritos, we note that the remainder of mankind presents statures which ascend almost uninterruptedly by degrees of millimeters from 1.54 m. to 1.75 m. These figures make the average 1.65 m. (5 ft. 5), as Topinard recognized. Topinard likewise proposed the division of statures into four classes which have been generally adopted. These are: short, less than 1.60 m.; below average, between 1.60 m. and 1.65 m.; above average, between 1.65 m. and 1.70 m.; tall, 1.70 m. and over. In English measure, these figures correspond almost exactly to under 5 ft. 3 in.; from 5 ft. 3 to 5 in.; from 5 ft. 5 to 7 in.; 5 ft. 7 and up.

The table also shows that there are many more populations-almost twice as many, in fact-whose stature is merely above or below average, than peoples of a decisively tall or short stature. That is, more races, nations, and tribes average between 5 ft. 3 and 5 ft. 7 in height than above and below these figures.

What is the influence of environment on stature? Since the time of Villermé the assertion has been repeatedly made that well-being favored and hardship stunted growth. There certainly are facts which seem to prove this. Well-fed upper classes possess a higher stature than the lower classes; thus, the English of the liberal professions are 69.14 in. (1757 m.) in height, the workmen of the same nation only 67.5 in. (1705 m.). . . .

HAIR

That one of the horny products of the skin which is most important for the classification of races, is undoubtedly the hair of the head and body. The general structure and number of the hairs-there are about 260 to each square centimetre-hardly show any difference between race and race. On the other hand, the length of the head hair, the proportions of this length in the sexes, the nature or texture of the hair, its transverse section, form, and color, vary greatly according to race.

Hair texture. Four principal varieties of hair are usually distinguished according to their aspect and texture-straight, wavy, frizzy, and woolly. It is easy to form a clear picture of these varieties at first sight; but careful examination shows that the differences are deeper, and best brought out by . . . microscopic examination of transverse sections. . . . If we calculate the index or percentage relation of the breadth to the length of the cross-sectioned hair in a great number of cases, we obtain satisfactory results, as Topinard and Ranke have shown in general for the Japanese, and Montano for the races of the Malay Archipelago..

Straight hair gives a circular section, while that from woolly hair has the form of a lengthened ellipse. This ellipse is less extended, a little more filled out, in the sections of wavy hair. If the major axis of the ellipse be supposed to equal 100, the minor axis will be represented by figures varying from 40 to 50 for the woolly hair of the Bushmen and Hottentots, from 50 to 60 for that of the Negroes, while the straight hair of the Eskimo will have this axis equaling 77, that of the Tibetans 80, of the Japanese 85. The hair of Europeans yields an oval in which the minor axis is from 62 to 72 per cent of the major, according to Topinard. It may be said with certainty, since the studies of Unna, that the woolly hair of the Negro rolls up into a compact spiral precisely because of the flatness of its elliptical section. . . .

A certain correlation appears to exist between the texture of the hair and its absolute and relative length. Thus, straight hair, as of the Chinese and American Indians, is at the same time the longest, while woolly hair is shortest-from 5 to 15 centimetres. Wavy hair occupies an intermediate position. Moreover, the difference between the length of the hair of men and women is almost inappreciable in the two extreme divisions. In some straight-haired races the head hair is as long in men as in women; one need but to call to mind the queus of the Chinese, or the beautiful heads of hair of the Indians, which occasionally attain a length of as much as 2 metres. In frizzy-haired races, on the contrary, the hair of the head is equally short in the two sexes; women's hair among the Bushmen, Hottentots, and even Negroes is not appreciably longer than that of men. It is only in the wavy and in part the frizzy

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »