WHY ARE WE RIGHT-HANDED? 



AN UNBIASED BIOLOGICAL ENQUIRY. 



By LEOPOLD KATSCHER. 



All the more important manual actions are accom- 

 plished by the right hand rather than the left. It is 

 the right hand that is used to hold the sword, tool 

 or pen, the right that shakes hands with another, 

 that gesticulates, gives the sign of blessing, takes 

 part in various ceremonies, and so on. The place of 

 honour is conceded to the right hand. In German 

 and French an awkward person is termed " linkisch " 

 and "gauche" respectively. In several other lan- 

 guages " clumsiness " is synonymous with " left- 

 handedness." The English word "sinister" comes 

 from the Latin for " left-handed." 



Shortly before his death Thomas Carlyle wrote : 

 " What extraordinary preference is given to the 

 right hand by all mankind ! It is probably a matter 

 of the very oldest human organisation. I wonder 

 whether a people exists that makes no difference 

 between the two hands. . . . Why just the right 

 hand should be chosen is an unanswerable question 

 not worth asking, unless it is to be treated as a 

 conundrum. Probably the matter originated in 

 fighting habits, for the left hand shields the heart 

 and surrounding parts better, and is the more suited 

 to carry the shield." 



What was considered as inexplicable by the sage 

 of Chelsea later investigators have regarded as well 

 worth research. This is particularly the case with 

 Sir Daniel Wilson, who also offers a plausible 

 explanation in his work on left-handedness, in which 

 theoretical investigation is combined with practical 

 observation, for he was himself left-handed. 



It is a fact that many people are left-handed — 

 how does this arise ? Is the general use of the 

 right hand alone a rooted, inherited consequence of 

 a primeval habit of mankind ? Or is it to be 

 attributed to natural and, therefore, more or less 

 immutable causes of a physical and constitutional 

 nature ? To become clear on the subject, investi- 

 gation must first be made as to the degree in which 

 right-handedness prevailed in the past and does 

 prevail in the present, and whether there was a time 

 when both hands were used indifferently, or whether 

 this has never been the case at all. The celebrated 

 novelist, Charles Reade, who was able to use both 

 hands with the same skill, and justly urged the 

 training of children to practical ambidexterity, 

 declared himself for the first hypothesis (that in 

 former times no difference was made) in his 

 " Coming Man " (1882), and asserted that there are 

 still savage tribes among which no preference is 

 shown for any one hand. If such is the case, the 

 preference would be the result of an artificial habit 



acquired later. A recent investigator, Dr. Ernst 

 Weber, also expresses his conviction that there was 

 a time when men used both arms indifferently. At 

 that time, those who happened to choose the right 

 arm for fighting had the advantage of shielding their 

 hearts as they pushed forward with the right side 

 foremost. "Thus more left-handed than right-handed 

 men perished before begetting progeny, and the 

 right-handed were, therefore, more often able to 

 transmit their habit of fighting with the right, and 

 so their numbers increased," while the left-handed, 

 who became ever fewer, endeavoured to overcome 

 their pernicious habit till right-handedness became 

 all but general. Dr. Manfred Frankel believes this 

 theory to be in accord with fact, as it may be 

 concluded from the statues that have come down to 

 us, that in the Stone Age there were many more left- 

 handed people than there are now. He adds : 

 " What happened in the fight may soon have been 

 retained in all other manipulations. Practical 

 deliberation caused them to pursue the course of 

 development once begun, and so right-handedness 

 was transmitted by heredity, and superinduced by 

 habit and training to a definite characteristic of 

 ■humanity." 



This hypothesis is not without deficiencies and, 

 therefore, not altogether satisfactory. Sir Daniel 

 Wilson, who devoted many years of study to the 

 subject, has come to quite a different conclusion 

 founded upon archaeological, palaeontological, philo- 

 sophical, geological and historical researches. As 

 regards the prehistoric cave-dwellers of the Stone 

 Age, Sir Daniel has most carefully examined their 

 flint implements and has come to the conclusion 

 that they were right-handed with rare exceptions. 

 He makes the same inference from the many refer- 

 ences in all the known oldest and most primitive 

 languages, as well as ancient writings. The fact 

 that several oriental languages, including Hebrew, 

 are not written from left to right, but in the opposite 

 direction, might at first sight argue for left-handed- 

 ness, but a closer examination contradicts the 

 supposition. These writings are not continuous, 

 they are separated, so that it is perfectly natural 

 that they should be written with the right hand. A 

 superficial inspection of some of the old Egyptian 

 monuments leads to an inference of left-handedness, 

 but a thorough study reveals this to be wrong. 

 Although in drawing the profile of a face a right- 

 handed artist would depict the left side as a matter 

 of course, and many Egyptian reliefs present faces 

 turned to the right, the reason is not to be found in 



205 



