H. — ANTHROPOLOGY. 145 



problem utile to the State, in that it throws Hght on whether nature 

 or nurture is the more Hkely to build up man's future — and save him 

 from tie recurrence of such another quinquennium. 



The critic to whom I have referred was not idle in his criticism. 

 He had not been taught that evolutionary doctrine has its bearings on 

 practical life. The biologist and the anthropologist are at fault; they 

 have too often omitted to show that their problems have a very close 

 relation to those of the statesman and the social reformer, and that the 

 problems of the latter cannot be solved without a true insight into 

 man's past, without a knowledge of the laws of heredity, and without a 

 due appreciation of the causes which underlie great folk-movements. 



(ii) Insistence on Institutes of Anthropology. 



The anthropological problems of the present day are so numerous 

 and so pressing that we can afford to select those of the greatest 

 utihty. Indeed, the three university institutes of anthropology I have 

 suggested would have to specialise and then work hard to keep abreast 

 of the problems which will crowd upon them. One might take the 

 European races, another Asia and the Pacific, and a third Africa. 

 America in anthropology can well look after itself. In each case we 

 need something on the scale of the Paris Ecole d'Anthropologie, with 

 its seventeen professors and teachers, with its museums and journals. 

 But we want something else — a new conception of the range of 

 problems to be dealt with and a new technique. From such schools 

 would pass out men with academic training fit to become officials, 

 diplomatic agents, teachers, missionaries, and traders in Europe, in 

 Asia, or in Africa, men with intelligent appreciation of and sympathy 

 with the races among whom they proposed to woi'k. 



But this extra-State work, important as it is, is hardly comparable 

 in magnitude with the intra-State work which lies ready to hand for 

 the anthropological laboratory that has the will, the staff, and the 

 equipment to take it up efficiently. In the present condition of affairs 

 it is only too likely that much of this work, being psychometric, will 

 fall into the hands of the psychologist, whereas it is essentially the 

 fitting work of the anthropologist, who should come to the task, it 

 fitly trained, with a knowledge of comparative material and of the 

 past history, mental and physical, of mankind, on which his present 

 faculties so largely depend. The danger has arisen because the anthro- 

 pometer has forgotten that it is as much his duty to measure the 

 human mind as it is his duty to measure the human body, and that it is 

 as much his duty to measure the functional activities of the human 

 body — its dynamical characters — as its statical characters. By dyna- 

 mical characters I understand such qualities as resistance to fatigue, 

 facility in physical and mental tasks, immunity to disease, excitability 

 under stimuli, and many kindred properties. If you tell me that we are 

 here trenching on the field of psychology and medicine, I reply: Cer- 

 tainly; you do not suppose that any form of investigation which deals, 

 with man — body or mind — is to be omitted from the science of man ? If 

 you do you have failed to grasp why anthropology is the queen of the 

 sciences. The University anthropological institute of the future will 



1930 r, 



