Febeuaky 19, 1915] 



SCIENCE 



275 



tis move, but move cautiously, heeding Pro- 

 fessor Ward's emphasis on doubtful ele- 

 ments in the relation of climate to disease. 

 Perhaps there is no subject, unless it be 

 politics, on v?hich men say so much and 

 know so little as about climate. 



Geography has a considerable body of 

 good knowledge of climate in relation to 

 modes of living in typical parts of the 

 world. We know that the Eskimo is carni- 

 vorous, the tropical savage vegetarian and 

 that the denizen of temperate latitudes 

 brings both foods to his table. We know 

 the climatic results in clothing and shelter, 

 in nomadic and pastoral, agricultural and 

 static life, and among hunters of the forest. 

 These are all important, but more or less 

 indirect climatic effects, so well set forth by 

 Herbertson in "Man and His Work." 



But what of direct effects of climate? I 

 hesitate to use the word direct of such 

 activity. Such is our ignorance of the pre- 

 cise efficiency of these forces, that apparent 

 direct agents may turn out to be mediate, 

 after all. 



How much exact knowledge have we in 

 the field of coloration? Grant that this is 

 mainly a physiological problem, so far as 

 man is concerned, will it ever be solved, 

 and the results broadly stated except in 

 collaboration with geography? 



Color almost certainly developed in strict rela- 

 tion to climate. Right away in the back ages we 

 must place the race-making epoch, when the chief 

 bodily differences, including differences in color, 

 arose amongst men. 



This is from Marett and he adds that 

 natural selection had a clear field with the 

 body before mind became the chief factor 

 in survival. 



Now, how much is definite here? What 

 is this "strict relation" to climate? And 

 what element of climate does the work? 

 Is it heat, or light, or moisture, or a com- 

 bination of these ? What does each climatic 

 factor do, and does it do what it does. 



independently, or by the aid of some non- 

 climatic factor? Why is the Malay brown, 

 the Chinaman yellow, the American Indian 

 coppery and the negro black ? And how do 

 the osteological features and the facial 

 features correlate, if at all, in origin, with 

 the color? Here is a vast field. What, of 

 assured answer, is on record? 



Brinton says that climate and food sup- 

 ply are the main causes of the fixation of 

 ethnic traits. He adds that temperature, 

 humidity and other factors bear directly 

 on the relative activity of lungs, heart, liver 

 and skin. This seems to come near to the 

 core of things, but no precision is reached 

 and I suppose can not be in the present 

 state of knowledge. Eatzel was not wrong 

 in citing the negro's dark skin as illus- 

 tration of the fact that the search for causes 

 goes after hard and deep-rooted things. 



The study of the races of Europe teems 

 with conjectures about blonde and brunette, 

 but the physiological basis is wanting. We 

 should like to know whether the Mediter- 

 ranean longhead is a darkened Teuton, or 

 whether the Teuton is a bleached African. 

 Here is joint work for physiologist, anthro- 

 pologist and geographer. 



Ward notes the fading of hair, beards 

 and skins of polar explorers.^" The same 

 author, leaving open the origin of color, 

 quotes Darwin on the accumulation of color 

 through natural selection and contents 

 himself with the assured fact that color, 

 however obtained, is an advantage in a hot 

 climate. This field therefore is almost un- 

 worked. I hesitate to say that the door for 

 research is wide open, but one would hesi- 

 tate even more to believe that the problem 

 can not be solved. 



Suppose now we leave these primitive 

 and racial puzzles and come down to pos- 

 sible effects of climate that can be seen and 

 registered in a few generations, if there be 



^sE. DeC. Ward, "Climate, Considered Espe- 

 cially in. Relation to Man," 216. 



