596 



NA TURE 



[April iS, 1895 



and peoples. These mixtures and these conibinations of 

 characteristics differ according to the character and number of 

 elements existing in the various nations of the south, the centre, 

 or the nonh of Europe. They arise from different relations 

 with mixed peoples. 



What is most important in this human hybridism, so various 

 and so complex, is the Lick of the blending of the external and 

 internal characteristics from which new human varieties may 

 be had. Among the different ethnic elements there exists 

 only a relation of position, called syncretism, or propinquity of 

 characteristics, and therefore a facility for forming small 

 groups. Such a phenomenon has already been recognised in 

 .\merica, and it is evident in Europe among peoples who 

 appear little homogeneous, if a careful observation separates the 

 characteristics constituting ethnic types and those of individuals 

 iu a mi.xed population. 



If there were no other cause for such an absence of blending 

 among the characteristics of human hybridism, this cause would 

 exist, that the relations which produce the mixtures are not 

 equal and constant, but are varied and inconstant. If there 

 should be the union of two pure ethnic types only, for several 

 generations, we should be able to derive a hybrid product constant 

 and fixed, as among animals and plants ; but a third element, 

 either pure or mixed, arrives in the second or third generation of 

 man, and so on indefinitely. Thus it is easy to understand 

 how unstable must be the characteristics of the hybrid, for they 

 can scarcely survive in one individual for a generation. The 

 hybrids which follow may have characteristics of different 

 types, with the tendency each time to have these reappear by 

 heredity, although not blended and not fixed in the individual. 



To this should be added another fact, that of individual 

 variation, which is present in man, as in other animals, 

 increased by his constant interminglings, which may be con- 

 sidered stimulants of this phenomenon, as has been suggested 

 by Darwin and Wallace. 



Hence, I conclude from my observations, that human 

 hybridism is a syncretism of characteristics belonging to many 

 varieties, and that these do not modify the skeletal forms as 

 do individual variations, and that hybridism m.iy affect 

 different parts of the skeleton, constituting characteristics in 

 themselves distinct. The stature, the thoracic form, the propor- 

 tion of the long bones, may be united with external character- 

 istics differing from each other, as well as from different 

 cranial structures. The cranial form may be associated with 

 different facial forms, and inversely. It happens, however, 

 that the structures taken separately remain in part unvaried in 

 the hybrid constitution. The face preserves its own character- 

 istics in spite of the union of different cranial forms ; so also 

 the cranium preserves its structures, associating them with 

 difl'erent facial forms. The stature preserves its own pro- 

 portions in spite of its asociations with different cranial 

 and facial types, and in spite of the different colouration 

 of the skin and the form and colour of the hair. All 

 this may be affirmed, particularly of much larger human 

 groups which, according to external characteristics, may be 

 considered much nearer than they really are in geographical 

 position, as the so-called white races in Europe, the negroes in 

 Africa, in Melanesia, and so on. 



Now, granting that all peoples exhibit the characteristics of 

 hybridism in the manner just described, it will be necessary to 

 learn how races, groups and human families may be classified. 

 Let us observe for a moment the classification by means of 

 external characteristics, most common among anthropologists 

 from Linnxus to Quatrefages and Klower, and we shall see : 



(1) That the colour of the human skin in one great group of 

 a type, such as yellow, black, or white, is of different grada- 

 tions, and not uniform. 



(2) Since, as above stated, all peoples, at least in a great 

 mea.surc, are composed of hybrid elements, it happens that dif- 

 ferent elements are united under one category, which is, in this 

 instance, the colour of the skin. 



(3) We must not forget that the external characteristics are 

 more easily lost, and much easier to acquire, by intermixture 

 and heredity. 



A curious example of what I state is found in human classifi- 

 cation according to <,)uatrefages, which perhaps is now the 

 most complete, considered only as a classification by external 

 characteristics. He place the Abyssinians within the white race 

 notwithstanding that Ihey have the negro colouring, and he 

 do€« so because he believes that the characteristic form of the 



NO, 1329, VOL. 51] 



skeleton or internal characteristics of the .\byssinian5 are those 

 of the white race. This is without doubt inconsistent when the 

 principle of classification by colour is accepted. This incon- 

 sistency itself shows the defect of the method and of the prin- 

 ciples mentioned as applied to human characteristics and their 

 combination. 



(4) Finally, as we perceive, the theory is not justified that 

 man be classified as a single species with three, five, or more 

 variations. 



If the characteristics which present greater stability are 

 internal or skeletal, they should serve for human classification : 



(a) Because, notwithstanding amalgamation and consequent 

 hybridism, the characteristics originating in the skeleton are 

 persistent. 



(if') Because they may be taken as fixed points with which 

 other characteristics may be associated, and may be also external, 

 as I shall demonstrate. 



{c\ Because, finally, the internal characteristics can demon- 

 strate the full number of divisions and subdivisions in classifying 

 ethnic groups, and in analysing peoples which are a combina- 

 tion of a great number of hybrids. 



It remains to determine which internal characteristics should 

 have the preference in deciding the value of types for classifica- 

 tion. If we consider the human skeleton, with that object in 

 view, we find three parts which may serve for that purpose, 

 the cerebral cranium, the face, and the stature, with the long 

 bones. 



Staltirt. — The stature is a good, but an insufficient character- 

 istic, because it gives only linear differences, and in its value 

 resembles greatly other external characteristics, and is associated 

 with all the most dissimilar derived from the skeleton. 



Face. — The face offers very important characteristics for 

 classification, because it shows typical differences in the ethnic 

 groups. The face has given more points for the distinction of 

 human types than the other parts of the human body, and 

 would appear better adapted for that purpose than the cerebral 

 cranium. But the face is more disposed to individual variations 

 than any other part, because it is very complex, being composed 

 of numerous small bones, clothed with muscles which have 

 continuous and important functions relating to the physiognomy, 

 to the expression of psychical conditions, and to the nutritive 

 functions. These facts render its typical form less constant, 

 and are, or may be, the cause of a multiplication of types. 



Cranium.— The cerebral cranium is itself also liable to varia- 

 tions. More than any other org-in, it exhibits a phenomenon 

 often observed and clearly demonstrated by me, that is, the 

 persistence of forms from immemorial epochs, and their repro- 

 duction through numerous generations notwithstanding amalga- 

 mation with other types. I have demonstrated such a persistence 

 of cr.inial forms in the varieties of the Mediterranean from the 

 Neolithic and from the most ancient Egyptian epochs ; other 

 anthropologists have recognised such persistence m European 

 types of the Quatenary epoch, and in others, very ancient, from 

 America. This cannot be said of the structure of the face. 



Therefore if the human cranium is accepted as a basis for 

 the classification of human groups, positive results may be had : 



(a) In groups which have been subjected to mixture in what- 

 ever epoch or however ni.iny times, the distinctive ethnic 

 elements may be discerned by examining the cerebral cranium 

 only, which, remaining unaltered in type, may be found united 

 by hybridism with other internal and external characteristics. 

 For the cranium is the point about which revolve all other 

 variations of form, either in hybridism or in the human form 

 itself. 



(i) Knowing the cranial types of a people who seem more 

 or less homogeneous, we are sure of learning of what and how 

 many ethnic elements it is composed, notwithstanding the 

 hybridism present. 



(<•) Having classified all the cranial types in different regions 

 and among different peoples, we may learn by their geographical 

 distribution the numerical extension of types and also their 

 geographical origin ; that is, the place of departure and the 

 course of emigraliin and dispersion of such forms. 



((/) Then it will be easy to learn what cranial characteristics 

 arc found among populations which already have ethnic names, 

 ancient and modern, and to discover among them points of 

 similarity and difference. 



Being, therefore, obliged on account of universal human hy- 

 bridism to select as a guide to classification the most important 

 and the most useful of the internal characteristics, we find 



