428 
Miscellanea 
Hybrid Jewish in appearance x Jew Jewish in appearance, 
j, „ „ x Jew intermediate in appearance, 
» „ ,, x Jew non- Jewish in appearance. 
Hybrid intermediate in appearance x Jew Jewish in appearance, 
» ,j „ x J ew intermediate in appearance, 
i) „ „ X Jew non- Jewish in appearance. 
Hybrid Gentile in appearance x Jew Jewish in appearance, 
)j „ „ x Jew intermediate in appearance, 
» „ „ x Jew non- J ewish in appearance. 
It is evident from this scheme that the problem is immensely more complex than is 
indicated by Dr Salaman. His belief that the Jew who appears recessive carries an inhibiting 
factor which prevents the appearance of " Jewishness " works in any case against his view, for 
when crossed with pure Gentile the offspring could not possibly be Jewish on any theory. But 
we can go further than this. Is the non-Jewish type so markedly recessive to the Jewish type 1 
While I thoroughly distrust any such vague category as " Jewishness," I have yet endeavoured to 
the best of my ability to apply it to certain data of my own and see in how far the results are 
consonant with Dr Salarnan's. The pedigrees here given refer in every case to families where 
intermarriage has not, within knowledge, occurred. 
I- df X ? 
i I 1 1 1 
I I I I I 
U - Cfl 0 2 I 3 <tf i #*5 
I. cfx ? 
I 
B r r | ' , r n 
II. afi tf 2 
i © o ¥ o 
O = Marked Jewish type. 
(D = Non-Jewish type. 
© = Intermediate type. 
Fig. I. 
These pedigrees indicate, I think, a dominance of the non-Jewish type. I give the results of 
the marriage of some of the above offspring on the opposite page. 
These show absolute divergence from Dr Salarnan's conclusions. In every case the cross 
between the distinctly non-Jewish type and the distinctly Jewish type gives dominance to the 
former. In the case of the intermediate type no definite conclusion seems possible. The result 
indeed is what the biometrician is beginning almost to expect in Mendelian work on man, that 
while one pedigree may admit of a Mendelian interpretation others no less certainly contradict 
it. If we use Dr Salarnan's classification, it is obvious that the non-Jewish looking Jew cannot 
possibly be regarded as a recessive. If it be regarded as DR, then in the crosses DR x DR the 
absence of RR is inexplicable. Now it does not seem to me that this divergence disproves the 
applicability of Mendelism to the facial expression in man, but it does demonstrate that it is 
purely idle to use vague categories of this kind, and then claim that any theory can be 
