NO. lO HUMAN HAIR AND PRIMATE PATTERN I NCJ MILLER II 



These two races of orangs inhabit separate parts of one cHniatic 

 zone, exactly as Caucasians and MongoHans inhabit opposite ends of 

 another. Therefore the differences in hair growth can be no more 

 attributed to the influence of unHke natural surroundings in the second 

 instance than in the first. But it seems clear that the two races of 

 orang and the two races of men are both in early stages of species 

 differentiation, and that the manner of their differentiating is one that 

 is common to the whole primate group. 



(d) Total graying. 



Often, though not invariably, the process of turning gray culmi- 

 nates in a stage of complete whiteness. But even when a human being 

 has turned gray over the entire body or even has lost all hair color 

 he has done nothing that is essentially new or peculiar for a primate. 

 Light gray or nearly white species of primates have arisen in both 

 Asia and South America. These animals are not albinistic nor in any 

 way individually abnormal. Their near relatives, living in the same 

 regions, are richly colored ; and there is nothing to indicate that either 

 light or dark has any advantage over the other. General graying and 

 whitening in man seems likely to be nothing more than another ex- 

 ample of human submission to a rule that some other primates have 

 followed. Therefore the strong tendency present in the " white race " 

 of man for the hair to lose its color at an early age may be part of 

 a racial process of depigmentation that has already almost whitened 

 the skin and that may be destined, in the future, to I)ring about 

 permanent whitening of the hair as well. 



CONCLUSION 



For the present I wish to avoid detailed discussion of the published 

 attempts to explain those peculiarities of human hair that have just 

 been passed in review. Most of the authors who have considered the 

 subject have done so from the view-point that these peculiarities must 

 have originated from conditions (pathological or cultural) or needs 

 (physiological or esthetic) that pertain exclusively to man. That this 

 view-point is wrong seems to be sufficiently indicated by the evidence 

 here selected from the large mass that I have assembled. This evidence 

 points to the probability that man has these characteristics because, 

 as a primate, he cannot avoid theuL They are common property of 

 the great group of mammals to which he pertains, and neither he nor 

 any other member of this group can wholly escape from the tenden- 

 cies imposed on all of them by their primate heritage. With regard 

 to no nonhuman primate can it be shown that the possession of any 



