THE RACIAL GEOGRAPHY OF EUROPE. 305 



which the last quarter century has produced. This has been done 

 for us by a master hand.* The logical rottenness of the Asiatic 

 hypothesis, even from the linguistic point of view alone, speedily 

 revealed itself to Latham, Omalius d'Halloy, and others; their con- 

 tentions were supported by evidences of man's existence in Europe 

 from the remotest antiquity, and of his gradual acquisition of culture 

 on the spot. Then, nearly twenty years ago, arguments based upon 

 the physical characteristics rather than the languages of living Euro- 

 pean peoples began to be injected into the controversy by Poesche, 

 Penka, and others. Within a decade, physical anthropology dealing 

 with living men, has struggled to its feet and claims the floor per- 

 haps to the damnation of its predecessors. It may justly be affirmed 

 that no other scientific question, with the exception of the doctrine 

 of evolution, was ever so bitterly discussed, or so confounded at the 

 hands of biased writers by religious and national prejudice. 



So much by way of introduction. Let us now at the outset dis- 

 tinguish culture, language, and race; let us rigidly avoid confusing 

 them in any respect. The cultural evidence in turn may be resolved 

 into several distinct parts: arts or customs, language, and perhaps 

 even mythology. Each concerns an entire science by itself. Their 

 relative importance is indicated in the order of naming. The credi- 

 bility of the testimony of each varies directly with its liability to 

 migrate in entire independence of any actual movement of peoples. 

 Physical traits, of course, are absolutely certain; arts and customs 

 are less apt than is language to be acquired abroad by mere contact: 

 Mythologies are most fluid of all. In this paper we shall deal 

 merely with the first of all these," namely, race, leaving the matter 

 of the origin of culture for future treatment. We shall deal with 

 physical anthropology and the witness of prehistoric archaeology 

 alone. Finally, we shall strive conscientiously to distinguish be- 

 tween the positively proved and the merely hypothetical. We shall 

 advance by propositions, keeping them in martial order, as we are 

 entering debatable territory. One great advantage alone we may 

 claim. As Americans, we should be endowed with " the serene im- 

 partiality of a mongrel," as the late Professor Huxley put it. No 

 logical conclusion has terror for us. Whether the noble Aryan be 



* The best statement of the progress of opinion upon the Aryan question is given by 

 Canon Taylor in the opening chapters of his Origin of the Aryans. Dr. Beddoe, in his 

 Anthropological History of Europe, has succinctly touched upon it also. In our Bibliog- 

 raphy of the Anthropology and Ethnology of Europe, soon to appear in a Bulletin of the 

 Boston Public Library, we have collected about a hundred titles of books and monographs 

 on this subject, indexed chronologically. This affords a striking picture of its relative im- 

 portance in the domain of ethnology. For convenience we shall refer to all papers in this 

 reference list by means of authors and dates alone. Full titles can be obtained by consult- 

 ing the list. 



vol. lii. 24 



