1893.] Archeology and Ethnology. 581 
Kate; The Chronology of Dilluvial Man in North America, Emile 
Schmidt; Indication of the Vestiges of the Pre-Columbian Population 
of Nicaragua, M. Desiré Pector; Human Sacrifice in America During 
Pre-Columbian Times, by M. Grossi; Cremation in America Before 
and After Christopher Columbus, by M. Grossi; Anthropology of the 
People d’Anahuac in the Times of Cortez, by M. Hartmann; Was 
America Peopled from Polynesia? by Horatio Hale; Study of the 
Mam Language, by the Comte de Charency ; Vocabulary of the Lang- 
uage Timucua, by M. Raoule de la Grasserie; The Linguistic Family 
of Pano, by the same; The Historic Archives of the Hemenway South- 
western Archeological Expedition, by M. Bandelier; On the Sam- 
baquis of Brazil, by M. H. Muller; Ancient Map of America, 
by Gaffarel ; Three Linguistic Families in the Amazon and Orinoco 
Rivers, by M. Adam; Bibliography of Recent Linguistic Investiga- 
tions in South America, by the same; Maya Handwriting by M. 
-Férstemann ; A Chronologic Classification of the Architectural Monu- 
ments of Ancient Peru, by M. Borsari ; Contribution to Americanism 
of Cauca (United States of Columbia) by M. Douay ; The Language 
of the People of the Center of South America by M. Von Den Steinen ; 
Peruvian Figures in Silver, by M. Luders. 
Language vs. Anatomy in Determining Human Races.— 
“Anthropologie,” replying to criticisms of Dr. Sergi’s work, thus states 
the position of French Anthropologists on this controverted subject : 
The Anthropologists of France are unanimous that some or a few 
(anatomic) characters are not sufficient to determine a type of race ; 
but there should be an investigation of all or as many as possible, and 
Anthropology does not interfere with Ethnography. They are occu- 
pied with different things. Anthropology does not say that physical 
characters are superior or inferior to linguistic characters ; it says the 
two sciences are of a different order and for a different purpose. The 
first relates to the physical element constituting peoples; the second to 
the classification of these peoples. Language grows, loses, borrows, 
changes, transforms, and all this independent of the Anthropological 
characters, such as beliefs, customs, industries. Physical characters are 
hereditary and inherent in the blood, while linguistie characters are 
not. A red Indian, born among strangers and without the society of 
his parents or race, will speak, not his own language, but the language 
of those who rear him, and, nevertheless, retain all the physical char- 
acters of his race. Different and opposing races may speak the same 
language, and per contra, the same race may speak different languages. 
