186 
POPULAR SCIENCE HE VIEW. 
of demarcation between man and the anthropoids,” the chief reason for this 
being apparently the development of the brain in the former ; the old and 
new world monkeys have an equal claim to separation, and this leads to the- 
adoption of M. Broca’s arrangement of the order Primates under five families,, 
the first of which is formed by man. 
M. Topinard next attacks a very difficult subject, namely, the specific 
unity or multiplicity of mankind. The greater portion of this section of his 
book is occupied by an excellent discussion of the physical and other 
characteristics of the races of man and a description of the methods of 
investigation employed by various savants. In his classification of races, 
which follows, he to a great extent discards the divisions into three or five 
great families which have so generally been adopted, regardingit as better in 
the present state of science to define a series of distinct types, and indicate 
their general relationships, leaving it to the future to group them, if it be 
possible, under larger categories. The difficulty of deciding whether these 
types are distinct species, equivalent to those recognized by zoologists in 
other groups, arises, according to the author, M from the confusion created 
by intermediate types, some due to crossing, others natural, and in a state of 
transition, such as we meet with in every degree in the animal series but 
if we take “ simple general types, as the white, the yellow, and the black 
with woolly hair ; or particular ones, such as the Scandinavian, the Semite, 
the Esquimaux, the Mongol, the Kaffir, the Bosjesman, the Negrito,’ the 
differences separating them are as great as those between species of the same 
genus of Mammals. From this and other arguments the author concludes 
that “ The Human Family, the first of the Order of Primates, is composed 
of Species, or fundamental human races.” We cannot help regarding this 
polygenistic argument as the weakest part of M. Topinard’s book. In dis- 
cussing such a question we have no right to leave out of consideration at all 
events the “ natural intermediate types, in a state of transition” above 
referred to ; and further, in the light of the transformist theory which M. 
Topinard seems inclined to adopt, we cannot realize the idea of “ fundamental 
human races” possessing “ primordial characters.” The last chapter of the 
book is devoted to a consideration of the origin and genealogy of man, in 
which, as already hinted, the author adopts the prevalent transformist views. 
In conclusion we may compliment Dr. Bartley on the manner in which he 
has performed his task. His translation reads admirably, and we have no 
doubt is on the whole very correct, but we have detected two or three 
places where he is evidently in error, although we have not the French original 
to refer to. One of these has already been pointed out ; another occurs at 
p. 532, when, in a sketch of Hackel’s genealogy of man, the adaptation to 
terrestrial life is said to have “ceased” instead of “commenced” at the 
sixteenth stage. At p. 22 there is the following passage : — “ The Didelphs, 
one of the most correctly defined of the sub-classes, from being based on 
their habitat, have been displaced and abolished, most of them being classed 
with the Edentata or the Rodents, the remainder becoming a distinct order 
under the name of Pedimana. ” This may not be a mistranslation, but it is 
certainly unintelligible to a zoologist. But the funniest error of all is at 
p. 199, where the French word “ddsormais” figures as the name of an 
author ! 
