SEPTEMBER 1, 1899. ] 
easily accessible a vast amount of scattered 
literature. He hasset forth, with great clear- 
ness and in a most fascinating form, certain re- 
sults obtained by detailed statistical inquiries 
of great magnitude. The graphical coordina- 
tion has been made with admirable skill, which 
will appeal to every one who knows the difli- 
culty involved in combining material collected 
according to different methods and under dif- 
ferent conditions. For this reason the useful 
and highly instructive maps of a large portion 
of Europe, and even of the whole globe, must 
be taken for what they are intended—as graphic 
representations of the known features of vari- 
ous human types so far as known at the present 
time, but without any claim to absolute accu- 
racy, which in the present state of our knowl- 
edge would be impossible. The material com- 
prised in these maps enables the author to pre- 
‘sent concisely and clearly a number of the most 
important problems of European somatology. 
The primary object of Professor Ripley’s 
studies is the explanation of the present distri- 
bution of human types in Europe. Four fac- 
tors determine the same: heredity, environ- 
ment, chance variation and selection. 
It is a difficult task to ascribe to each of these 
its proper sphere of influence in the develop- 
ment of the human types inhabiting a conti- 
nent whose people have undergone so many 
changes of location as those of Europe. Pro- 
fessor Ripley agrees with most authors in rec- 
ognizing three fundamental types in Europe: 
the long-headed, dark Mediterranean; the short- 
headed, brunet Alpine ; and the long-headed, 
blond Teutonictype. The author rightly dwells 
on the fact that, on the whole, human types 
are comparatively stable in given areas, and 
for this reason prefers to give to the types geo- 
graphical names (p. 128). He suggests that it 
would have been desirable to designate the 
type of northwestern Europe also by a geo- 
graphical term—such as Deniker’s ‘ Nordic’— 
rather than by a national term, such as ‘ Teu- 
tonic,’ which he uses throughout. The preva- 
lent types of various regions he explains largely 
as due to mixtures of these fundamental types, 
and as modifications due to environment, 
chance variation and selection. 
The multiplicity of these causes and our lack 
SCIENCE. 
‘ 293 
of knowledge of the mode of their action make 
all conclusions based on them very doubtful. 
The causes may be combined in various man- 
ners to explain a given phenomenon. The 
lower stature of mountaineers is explained by 
less favorable economic conditions, while the 
still less favorable influence of the highest re- 
gion is said to be counterbalanced by its selec- 
tive influence, which eliminates the less vigor- 
ous elements of the population. When the 
obscure effects of social or geographical enyi- 
ronment are insufficient to explain existing con- 
ditions, heredity as expressed by mixture, and 
selection or chance variation, enter as conyven- 
ient factors which enable us to find a plausible 
explanation. The ease with which the ex- 
tremely complex phenomena can be explained 
by various combinations of these causes seems 
to me a reason of weakness of the conclusions 
set forth by Professor Ripley. Our ignorance 
of the conditions which influence modification 
of inherited form suggest that before accepting 
a given theory we should seek for historical 
corroboration of the same. This has been 
given in a few cases, as in the discussion of the 
types of Britanny (p. 101); but sufficient his- 
torical and archeological evidence is not avail- 
able or has not been given to raise many con- 
clusions beyond serious doubt. It would seem 
that combinations of causes such as are brought 
forward to explain the conditions in Burgundy 
(p. 144) are so uncertain that they cannot be 
considered more than a very risky hypothesis. 
The uncertainty of this method is also well 
illustrated in the discussion of the character- 
istics‘of the types of the Alps. The author is 
led to explain in many places the permanance 
of the Alpine types by the remoteness and un- 
attractiveness of Alpine valleys, while in others 
the high variability of the Alpine population is 
explained by the assumption that the valleys 
contain the ‘ethnological sweepings of the 
plains’ (p. 106). Historical evidence is just as 
much necessary in the study of physical types 
as it is in that of geographical names, which 
are very liable to lead to erroneous results, un- 
less studied in their oldest accessible forms. 
Only when our knowledge of the causes influ- 
encing human types is much more definite than 
it is now may we hope to reconstruct the de- 
