g Q ] ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA gg 



age number for the entire period considered is well under 

 this figure. 



It will be noted that the relative literary fecundity of 

 the smaller groups varied considerably from the relative 

 prominence of these groups in the population. Since 

 the figures are so small, however, there is no reason for 

 supposing that this variation was due to more than 

 chance fluctuation. So far as the facts presented in this 

 table are concerned, it may well be believed that nation- 

 ality strains produced literati in proportion to their 

 numbers, since, in the one large group in which the 

 cases observed are sufficiently numerous to serve as the 

 basis of reasonable generalization, namely, the British 

 stock, it will be observed that the proportional contri- 

 butions to the literary class and to the general population 

 were practically the same. Thus it appears that literary 

 persons were not the peculiar possessions of any one 

 nationality strain, but were to be found in all strains, 

 scattered throughout the entire population of the 

 country. 1 



Additional evidence of the truth of the foregoing pro- 

 position is found in Professor Cooley's effective rebuttal 

 of Galton's argument that the ancient Greeks were abler 

 than modern Englishmen, and that Hellenic superiority 

 was due solely to superior stock. Cooley also met 

 Galton on his own ground, showing that during the age 

 of Elizabeth the supposedly inferior English people pro- 

 duced in proportion to the number of educated citizens, 

 quite as many men of genius as did Athens during the 

 age of Pericles. 2 



1 Cf. Cattell, Popular Science Monthly, vol. 86, p. 505. 



' : Charles H. Cooley, " Genius, Fame, and the Comparison of Races," 

 Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 

 ix, pp. 317-358, especially pp. 338 et seq. 



