June 19, 1914] 



SCIENCE 



903 



can see from this table there is no tendency 

 for the mentally superior grades (8), (9), 

 (10) to be filled with succession inheritors. 



It is thus seen that from 54 to 71 per cent, in- 

 herited the succession in the different grades. The 

 upper grades are in no way composed of men whose 

 opportunities were enhanced by virtue of this high 

 position. Thus we see that a certain very decided 

 difference in outward circumstances — namely, the 

 right of succession — can be proved to have no ef- 

 fect on intellectual distinction, or at least so small 

 as to be unmeasurable without much greater data. 



The criticism which I have received comes 

 in the form of a private letter from Professor 

 J. McKeen Cattell and is so much to the point 

 that it has called for the reinvestigation 

 which I am here giving. The criticism is as 

 follows : 



It seems to me that the figures in your table 

 (" Royalty, " p. 285) may be explained by the fact 

 that the monarchs attaining (9) and (10) come 

 from a smaller group than those who are not mon- 

 archs. The encyclopedias would note all those at- 

 taining ranks (9) or (10) whether monarchs or not. 

 The heredity being the same, the non-monarchs 

 should, on your hypothesis, supply a larger number 

 in these grades. As the monarchs supply one half 

 of the (9) and (10) grades (there appears to be an 

 error in the percentage under (9)i) it follows that 

 their grade was increased by their ofiice. In grades 

 (1) and (2), on the other hand, monarchs would be 

 more likely to be included than other members of 

 royal families. 



It will be at once seen that this criticism is 

 directed towards two points which I had not 

 at that time determined — (1) what are the 

 chances that an adult male member of the 

 families studied will succeed to the throne. 

 In other words, what is the per cent, of sover- 

 eigns to non-sovereigns when all adult males 

 are considered? (2) What allowance should 

 be made for the " obscure " princes or sover- 

 eigns? How many of these are there and is 

 their presence such as to introduce a signifi- 

 cant error? 



It is not surprising that one unacquainted 

 with royal genealogies should suppose that 



1 This is a typographical error. The 8 should 

 read 12. 



the total number of reigning sovereigns should 

 be less than the total number of younger 

 brothers (non-inheritors of the succession). 

 The House of Hanover in modern England 

 would give one this false impression. Here 20 

 adult males furnish but 6 reigning sovereigns. 

 But the precise record of all the direct lines 

 included in my study shows that this is a 

 marked exception. On the average a little 

 more than half of the males (who live to be 

 25 years) have become reigning sovereigns by 

 inheritance. This is due to the fact that, in 

 spite of the high fecundity in royal families, 

 during the period studied, the adult males 

 average only between 2 and 3 (2.33 in Table 

 II.) in each " fraternity." There are many 

 instances where a sovereign succeeds his 

 brother, and this brings the proportion to more 

 than one in two. 



The percentage 62.5 for succession inherit- 

 ors, in the table given above, is somewhat 

 higher than that given for the table below 

 perhaps in part because the table above in- 

 cluded maternal grandfathers. These are 

 sometimes of houses of less importance and 

 grandeur than the great houses that form the 

 chief male lines. It is probable that they are 

 not often younger sons, consequently they are 

 more apt to be sovereigns. Be that as it may 

 it makes no difference since an accurate and 

 systematic table is now prepared. These fig- 

 ures which are given below (Table II.) deal 

 with the 832 adult persons who are in the 

 male lines in " Heredity in Royalty." 403 

 of these are males. 220 or 54.6 per cent, be- 

 came sovereigns by inheritance. The geneal- 

 ogy which I have used is the exhaustive and 

 authoritative " Genealogie der in Europa 

 regierenden Fiirstenhauser " by Dr. Kamill 

 von Behr. It contains the direct lines of all 

 the " Reigning Sovereigns " families of the 

 present day. These are the same as found in 

 the " Almanach de Gotha," Premiere Partie, 

 but the " Genealogie " of von Behr traces 

 them back as far into the past as possible. 

 Von Behr does not include the non-reigning 

 families, found in the " Almanach de Gotha," 

 Deuxieme Partie. These mediatized German 

 royal families have the rights of equality of 



