LIFE OF FLOWER 165 



including Europeans, the ancient Egyptians, and the 

 modern fellahin of the Nile delta, the natives of India, 

 the Ainu of Japan, and the Veddas of Ceylon. 



In the main, this classification has been very gener- 

 ally accepted by anthropologists, although exception 

 has naturally been taken to some of the items. The 

 Australians, for instance, which differ markedly from 

 all the undoubted representatives of the Negroid 

 branch, form a case in point. Sir William was inclined 

 to think that these people do not form a distinct race 

 at all, but that they may be derived from a Melanesian 

 stock, modified by a strong infusion of some other race, 

 probably a low Caucasian type, more or less nearly 

 allied to the Veddas of Ceylon or some of the 

 Dravidian races of Southern or Central India. It is 

 added, however, that the Australians may possibly be 

 mainly sprung from a very primitive type, from which 

 the frizzly-haired Negroes branched off; frizzly hair 

 being probably a specialised feature not the common 

 attribute of the ancestral man ; confirmation of this 

 last supposition being afforded, it may be mentioned, 

 by the straight hair of the man-like apes. 



Neither of the above theories is, however, alto- 

 gether satisfactory ; and it has been suggested by some 

 writers that the Australians, like the Veddas of Ceylon, 

 and the Indian Dravidians, are a very primitive 

 Caucasian type. Against this, is their scapular index, 

 their large teeth, and projecting jaws (which must 

 not be confused with protrusion of the lips alone). 

 Until, however, we know which of the three great 

 human branches was the one which traces its origin 

 back to ape-like creatures, it is almost impossible to 



