880 
under widely different geological relations, and 
before language had developed. ‘He considers 
the following three propositions ‘established 
beyond question :’ 1. Man isas oldin America 
asin Europe. 2. The oldest American skulls 
present the same type as those of the modern 
Indians. 3. Between the languages of America 
and Asia there is a gulf which cannot be bridged. 
(P. 42.) 
The special portion of the book is divided 
into two parts, the one supplying the measure- 
ments on the living subjects, the other those on 
skulls and skeletons. Numerous illustrations 
from photographs, detailed tables and outlines 
of skull-forms greatly aid the student in ob- 
taining clear ideas of the physical characters of 
the tribes mentioned. They include the Caribs, 
Bakairi, Tupis, Botocudos, Chaco tribes, and 
those of the valley of the Purus River. 
The general conclusion which he draws from 
these extensive comparisons will be surprising 
to many, especially those who have said so 
much about the ‘Mongoloid’ traits of the 
American Indians. ‘‘So far as their physical 
traits are concerned, these Indians of ours ap- 
proach much more closely the types of the Cau- 
casian than of the Mongolian race. The arms 
and generally the upper extremities, the eleva- 
tion of the symphysis and the navel, are thor- 
oughly European.’’ (P: 130.) 
The osteological material was mainly from 
the Bororo, Karaya and Kayapo tribes. It is 
figured fully and the measurements presented 
in detail. Some of the skulls were of low ca- 
pacity and their nannocephalic character sug- 
gests the already known relations of the people 
of the Purus, among whom they prominently 
occur, to the Arawacks of the northern shores 
of the continent, and to the island-dwellers of 
the West Indian archipelago. 
The general impression left after an examina- 
tions of the craniological measurements, how- 
ever, is one of wide diversity, a diversity not 
satisfactorily explained by the author’s various 
suggestions of amalgamation and environment, 
but from its sporadic abundance, going back to 
sources of variation in skull-proportions which 
diminish their value as race criteria. 
The work is furnished with a table of con- 
tents, an index of authors quoted, and one of 
SCIENCE. 
[N.S: Vou. VL No. 154. 
subjects; a completeness of reference which it 
is a pleasure to note. D. G. BRINTON. . 
The present volume is of great importance, 
not only on account of the detailed information 
given in the special part of the work, but also on 
account of a critical examination of the methods 
of somatology. The following lines are intended 
as a review of this general part of the work. 
Dr. Ehrenreich is one of the few anthropol- 
ogists who have an equal command of somato- 
logical, ethnological and linguistic methods. 
His criticism of modern somatology is directed 
mainly against the excessive weight given to 
measurements as compared to morphological 
description and to the loose use of the terms 
race and type. 
He would reserve the term ‘race’ for the 
principal divisions of mankind, while he would 
call the varieties of these main divisions ‘types.’ 
He objects strongly to the application of the 
term ‘race’ to closely affiliated varieties which 
differ in regard to a few measurements, while 
their fundamental morphological features are 
much alike. He justly attributes much of the 
confusion prevailing in anthropological litera- 
_ture to a lack of clear distinction between the 
main groups and their subdivisions, and partic- 
ularly to the tendency which has developed 
of recent years to consider a few anthropomet- 
rical criteria as a sufficient basis for the estab- 
lishment of a new race. 
In determining the ‘races,’ or the main di- 
visions of mankind, Ehrenreich demands the 
consideration of three principal phenomena. 
He claims that each race is characterized by 
similarity of anatomical traits, geographical 
continuity of habitat, and similarity of the 
structure of the languages spoken by the people 
constituting the race. The first two points are 
well taken. They refer, of course, to conditions 
prevailing before the modern migrations of 
races. I doubt, however, if it is admissible to 
introduce the last point of view in the definition 
of the principal divisions of mankind. Ehren- 
reich is led to include languages in the. charac- 
terization of races by three considerations. He 
says: (1) Every race has developed a greater 
or lesser number of characteristic linguistic 
stocks. (2) These stocks are not found outside 
