March 12, 1886.] 



SCIENCE. 



247 



a few errors, which, though trifling in themselves, 

 have given us a distrust of the whole book, and 

 especially of that portion dealing with modern 

 history. 



The first sentence is from p. 295, and is as fol- 

 lows : " John (surnamed Sansterre or Lackland, a 

 name given to younger sons who died before they 

 were old enough to hold fiefs) was chosen king." 

 Of course, this statement is absurd. It is singular 

 that Professor Fisher should not have seen it ; for 

 the definition is correctly given by Miss Thompson, 

 whose admirable 1 History of England ' the author 

 seems to have read with some care : " John, 

 surnamed Sansterre or Lackland (a name given to 

 younger sons whose fathers died before they were 

 of age to hold fiefs)." Then, again, take the fol- 

 lowing from p. 315. The author has been speak- 

 ing of Llewellyn, and goes on to say, that, " when 

 a rebellion broke out several years later, Wales 

 was conquered, and the leader of the rebellion exe- 

 cuted (1273)." Now, of course, the author knows 

 that Llewellyn was killed in a chance skirmish, 

 and that it was his brother David who was exe- 

 cuted in 1283, not 1273 ; but he should have said 

 so. Then, too, on the very next page (316), the 

 date 1292, which is assigned to the defeat of War- 

 renne by Wallace at Stirling Bridge, should be 

 1297 : while on the following page (317) Isabel is 

 said to have returned from France, bent on the 

 overthrow of her husband, Edward II., in 1325, in- 

 stead of 1326. Now, here, on three successive 

 pages, are three dates — and three very important 

 dates — wrongly given. No doubt they are mis- 

 prints, or mere slips of the pen ; but the greatest 

 care should have been taken to prevent just such 

 errors. It must not be supposed that such failings 

 are confined to this part of the book, or to English 

 history, as, in whichever direction we have turned, 

 the same want of care has been observed. In 

 American history, in European history, and even 

 in ancient history, similar errors have been found. 



The sections devoted to the history of the people 

 — to the literature, theology, art, etc., of the dif- 

 ferent periods — are good as far as they go. The 

 maps of classical times are mainly printed from 

 the same plates as those in the ' Standard classical 

 atlas,' issued by the same publishers (Science, vii. 

 p. 51) : those relating to more modern events, 

 while not so large, are clear and fairly accurate. 

 The most serious omission in this part of the book 

 is the lack of a map showing the partitions of Po- 

 land. Taken altogether, the maps add something 

 to the value of the work. So, too, do the various 

 genealogical tables ; while the little bibliographies, 

 though very general, will serve to start the inquir- 

 ing student in the right direction. It is to be re- 

 gretted that an insufficient index impairs what- 



ever usefulness as a work of reference the volume 

 might otherwise have had. 



COMPARATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF JEWISH 

 ABILITY. 



The pronounced racial characteristics of the 

 Jewish people, with their remarkable persistency 

 of type, have always rendered them a favorite 

 subject for ethnological study. The peculiar 

 environments in which they have been placed, 

 and the almost constant persecution to which they 

 have been subjected, have certainly given their 

 impression to the mental characteristics of the 

 race, and in many respects we see these as sharply 

 portrayed as the peculiar physiognomic cast. 



Mr. Joseph Jacobs has recently published (Jour- 

 nal of the anthropological institute of Great 

 Britain and Ireland, February, 1886) an analysis 

 of the characteristics of more than thirty thou- 

 sand eminent men with especial reference to the 

 Jewish race. The conclusions he arrives at are 

 of the greatest interest, and in some cases unex- 

 pected from the crude inductions of common ex- 

 perience. 



Jews have no distinction whatever as agricul- 

 turists, engravers, sailors, and sovereigns. They 

 are less distinguished than Europeans generally, 

 as authors, divines, engineers, soldiers, statesmen, 

 and travellers, but approximately their equal as 

 antiquaries, architects, artists, lawyers, natural 

 scientists, political economists, scientists, and 

 sculptors. They seem to have superiority as 

 actors, chess-players, doctors, merchants (chiefly 

 financiers), metaphysicians, musicians, poets, and 

 philologists. One would, however, have expected 

 a much larger contingent of lawyers and political 

 economists than is actually found, and art is bet- 

 ter represented among them than one would sup- 

 pose. The sciences also, both biological and exact, 

 show a greater equality than most people would 

 expect. As regards the former, of course 

 Jews have no Darwin. It took England a hun- 

 dred and eighty years after Newton before she 

 could produce a Darwin : and as the Britishers 

 are five times as many as the Jews, even includ- 

 ing those of Russia, it would take, on the same 

 showing, nine hundred years before they could 

 produce another Spinoza ; or even, supposing the 

 double superiority to be true, four hundred and 

 fifty years would be needed. But, even in the 

 lower ranks of biology, Jews have done and are 

 doing good work. Bernstein, Cohn, Remak, 

 Rosenthal, and Valentin as physiologists, Cohn- 

 heim, Hirsch, Liebreich, Lombroso, and Traube as 

 pathologists, will be recognized ; while F. Cohn is 

 perhaps the third greatest botanist in Germany. It 



