May 6, 1892.] 



SCIENCE. 



255 



into the mysteries of their art that all possible misunder- 

 standings be avoided : certainly that they themselves make 

 no effort to mislead those they would instruct. Yet an 

 architectural exhibition that consists only of exteriors not 

 only fails in giving the public a true insight into what archi- 

 tecture really is, but is actuall}', though not intentionally, a 

 deliberate deception. Every architect knows that the de- 

 signing of the facade is not the only thing he has to do in 

 designing a building; why, then, should he not let the pub- 

 lic know what he does and how he does it, and make his 

 exhibitions practical schools in practical architecture, instead 

 of simply exhibitions of facades, or pretty or ugly things — 

 for such is the way of architecture — as the case might be. 



When many older bodies fail in this respect, and keep on 

 failing year after year, it is not to be expected that the 

 Brooklyn Institute should make a beginning by inaugurating 

 this much needed reform. As architectural exhibitions go 

 the Brst attempt was a very good one, but it is well to keep 

 in mind that it was not, really, an architectural exhibition, 

 but an exhibition of facades. While this is perfectly true 

 it contained, for its size, rather more detail drawings of a 

 certain kind than have many more ambitious undertakings. 

 There are several plans for the Protestant Episcopal Cathe- 

 dral in New York with sections and other details, and a 

 group of detailed drawings in the competition for the Brook- 

 lyn Savings Bank are especially attractive for the full man- 

 ner in which they illustrate their subject. The greater the 

 proportion of such drawings in our architectural exhibitions, 

 the greater their success, and the more will the people realize 

 the true nature and uses of architecture. 



In the introduction to the catalogue the Brooklyn Insti- 

 tute lays down a wise programme, " occasional gatherings of 

 the best results and suggestions." The programme is wise 

 enough, and right enough, but unfortunately it is one of 

 those things that can never be carried out. It depends, of 

 course, upon the meaning attached to the word "best." If it 

 is used in the sense of good, it is an unwise limitation, since 

 an architectural exhibition that would consist only of the 

 best of good buildings would be extremely limited. If it is 

 used in the sense of the best that modern work affords it is 

 simply repeating what would evidently follow from an exhi- 

 bition arranged by architects. Unfortunately, no architect- 

 ural exhibition can consist only of the best buildings; there 

 is so much that cannot be classed as such that a too rigid 

 scrutiny would deprive such a collection of many important 

 examples of the newest work. Unfortunately, too, it is also 

 true that the importance of an enterprise is no criterion for 

 the excellence of its architecture. New York has seen many 

 noteworthy structures erected which were disgraces both to 

 the architects and those financially responsible for them. 

 Even the Brooklyn exhibition contained drawings of large 

 undertakings which all lovers of a higher architecture must 

 regret to see carried into execution. 



Some things necessarily hamper exhibition committees. 

 The public naturally expect to see drawings of great build- 

 ings in first-class architectural exhibitions, and it is for the 

 public the exhibitions are held and from it their support 

 should come, if it does not. It is simply one of the archi- 

 tectural conditions that cannot be ignored and that will 

 lower the standards of our architecture and our architectural 

 exhibitions until a broader and more discriminating taste is 

 manifested in the people generally. Then indeed will archi- 

 tectural exhibitions be a success and a pleasure, a source of 

 instruction and delight, a record of past progress, and an 

 inspiration to newer conquests. Baer Feeree. 



CURRENT NOTES ON ANTHROPOLOGY. — V. 



[Edited by D. G. Brinton, M.D., LL.D.'] 

 Criminal Anthropology. 



One of the most actively cultivated and also one of the 

 most immediately practical branches of anthropology is that 

 which occupies itself with criminals. 



It may conveniently be presented as consisting of three 

 departments, one of observation, the second of explanation, 

 and the third of application. The first takes note of the 

 anatomical and physiological peculiarities of criminals, their 

 psychology, the diseases to which they are most liable, their 

 nationality and ancestry, their nutrition, the environment in 

 which they have lived, etc. The second undertakes the 

 more diflBcult task of explaining these peculiarities, relying 

 principally on the laws of heredity, atavism, congenital ten- 

 dencies, early impressions and pathological sequelae. The 

 third, basing itself on the inferences thus drawn, aims to 

 suggest such modifications in penal laws, and in the manage- 

 ment of reform schools and houses of detention as will mini- 

 mize the objectionable I'esults indicated. 



Anthropologists believe that this is the only method of 

 procedure to deal intelligently with the great and growing 

 problem of criminality. On ascertained facts of this nature, 

 philanthropists and legislators must hereafter base their 

 efforts, if they would attain the best results. To those who 

 would like to pursue the subject, two works may be recom- 

 mended, both published in Paris last year — Dr. X. Pran- 

 cotte, " L'Anthropologie Criminelle," and Dr. Lombroso, 

 "L'Anthropologie Criminelle et ses Recents Progres," while 

 Dr. Thomas Wilson of the Smithsonian Institution has re- 

 cently issued an excellent review and summary of the sub- 

 ject. 



The Origin of the Alphabet. 



We may well excuse Plato for crediting the legend that 

 the letters of the alphabet were disclosed to man by the gods 

 themselves. Certain it is that down till to-day we have 

 reached no positive data as to their origin. It appears that 

 the old notion that the Phoenicians discovered them must be 

 abandoned. Dr. Eduard Glaser, whose long and arduous 

 researches into the epigraphy of Southern Arabia promise to 

 throw an unexpected light on a large tract of ancient history, 

 expresses himself (in Das Ausland, December, 1891) quite 

 positively that it is in Arabia we must search for the begin- 

 nings of this marvellous invention, and probably in Southern 

 Arabia. There, perhaps nearly three thousand years B.C., 

 the ancestors of the Minjeans and Sabeans appear to have 

 developed several related phonetic alphabets, from some one 

 of which the so-called Phoenician was descended. Dr. Glaser 

 has obtained copies of some of these as yet undeciphered in- 

 scriptions, probably more than four thousand years old. 



What seems sure is, that though the early Egyptian hiero- 

 glyphic writing may have suggested the alphabet, the Egyp- 

 tians themselves never developed it. What is more remarka- 

 ble, and it seems to me has not received sufficient attention, 

 is the gradual degeneration of the early Egyptian phonetic 

 hieroglyphic system into one mainly ideographic and symbolic 

 in the late demotic writing. The signs in the latter have 

 often no more relation to sound than have the symbols of 

 Chinese script. Thus, three points between two vertical 

 lines, I ... I , means, in the demotic, "man;" but it was 

 in no way understood to represent the sounds which were in 

 the word, roemt, man, in the spoken dialect. 



This degeneracy gradually arose from changes in the 

 phonology of the tongue, while the hieroglyphic signs were 



