NOTICE OF A SKULL BROUGHT FROM THE CRIMEA. 325 
bones. A comparison of the skull with a cast of one of the most 
beautiful classic busts in the Townley collection, seemed to the en- 
thusiastie craniologist as though he had acquired the actual skull of 
the head from which the ancient marble was copied; and when 
placed alongside of the only Greek skull in his collection, the Geor- 
gian was superior to it, the Greek being next in rank. 
Hence it was that Blumenbach adopted his Georgian skull as a 
typical cranium, for the most perfectly developed division of the 
human species. In the same decade in which the Georgian skull 
appears, the term Caucasian is introduced in connexion with it; 
and along with this term of classification appear also those of Mongo- 
lian and Ethiopian; and these, with the epithets Malay, and 
American,—subsequently added,—formed the names of a quinary 
division of the human species, which he conceived his physical re- 
searches to have established. By the term Caucasian, Blumenbach 
meant no more than the adoption of a convenient name for his highest 
division of the human species, the typical characteristics of which 
were most completely epitomised in his symmetrical cranium. But 
the associations and historical traditions connected with Mount 
Caucasus, supplied a tempting basis for theory and speculation. The 
mountain range was assumed by some as the central point for the 
origin of mankind; and the epithet derived from it is now associated 
with so many extravagant ideas, and so much loose and confused 
classification, that the vague uncertainty it has acquired is abundantly 
sufficient to justify its abandonment. When, however, Dr. Latham 
substitutes the term Dioscurian for Caucasian, in its limited sense 
as applicable to the inhabitants of the actual area of Mount Caucasus, 
he does so not only from different data to those employed by Blu- 
menbach, but even in defiance of such analogies as their ascertained 
physical conformation seems to suggest. He accordingly admits 
that he occupies exceedingly debateable ground. “So long has the 
term Caucasian been considered to denote a type of physical con- 
formation closely akin to that of the Lapetide, i. e. pre-eminently 
European, that to place the Georgians and Circassians in the midst 
of the Mongolide, is a paradox. Again, the popular notions founded 
upon the physical beauty of the tribes under notice, are against such 
a@ juxta-position ; the typical Mongolians, in this respect, have never 
been mentioned by either poet or painter, in the language of praise.” 
Perhaps, however, the facts which justify Dr. Latham in saying of 
