Race, Language and Culture

BOAS

PREFACE

Anthropology, the science of man, is often held to be a subject that may satisfy our curiosity regarding the early history of mankind, but of no immediate bearing upon problems that confront us. This view has always seemed to me erroneous. Growing up in our own civilization we know little how we ourselves are conditioned by it, how our bodies, our language, our modes of thinking and acting are determined by limits imposed upon us by our environment. Knowledge of the life processes and behavior of man under conditions of life fundamentally different from our own can help us to obtain a freer view of our own lives and of our life problems. The dynamics of life have always been of greater interest to me than the description of conditions, although I recognize that the latter must form the indispensable material on which to base our conclusions.

My endeavors have largely been directed by this point of view. In the following pages I have collected such of my writings as, I hope, will prove the validity of my point of view.

The material presented here is not intended to show a chronological development. The plan is rather to throw light on the problems treated. General discussions are followed by reports on special investigations on the results of which general viewpoints are based.

On the whole I have left the statements as they first appeared. Only in the discussion of the problems of stability of races and of growth which extend over many years, has scattered material been combined. In these the mathematical problems have been omitted and diagrams have been substituted for numerical tables. Here and there reviews and controversies have been included where they seemed relevant and of importance for the clearer statement of theories.

The terms race and racial are throughout used in the sense that they mean the assembly of genetic lines represented in a population.

It is natural that the earlier papers do not include data available at the present time. I have not made any changes by introducing new material because it seemed to me that the fundamental theoretical treatment of problems is still valid. In a few cases footnotes in regard to new investigations or criticisms of the subject matter have been added.

I have included two very early general papers at the end of the book because they indicate the general attitude underlying my later work.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Alexander Lesser whose help and advice in the selection of material has been of greatest value.

Franz Boas

Columbia University

November 29, 1939

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RACE

Composition of American population, 3; definition of race, 5; family lines composing races, 5; intermingling of races, 5; effect of environment, 7; selective processes, 8; functional significance of bodily build, 8; variability of physiological functioning, 9; variability of mental functioning, 10; significance of intelligence tests, 11; influence of culture and environment upon intelligence tests, 12; changes in emotional reaction of peoples, 13; social basis of race antagonism, 14; social groups as closed societies, 14; effect of stratification of society in social groups based on racial characteristics, 16

European immigrants, Mestizos and Mulattoes, 18; mixture in Anglo-Saxon and Latin-American countries, 19; characteristics of mixed races, 19; physical characteristics of half-blood Indians, 20; mental tests of Mulatto children, 21; continuity of Indian tradition, 21; continuity of African tradition, 22; Mendelian inheritance, 22; intermingling of European types, 23; intra-racial marriages, 25; intermingling of types in Europe, 25; changes of type of descendants of immigrants, 26; eugenics, 26

Intermingling in Europe, 28; intermingling of European types in the United States, 30; stability of agricultural communities, 30; migrations due to development of urban populations, 30; migrations in the United States, 31; inbreeding, 31; homogeneous and heterogeneous populations, 32; meaning of the hereditary stability of a population, 33; effect of endogamy, 34; Mendelian inheritance, 34; influence of environment upon type, 35; influence of social habits upon type, 37; influence of selection upon type, 38; selective mating, 38; selective effects of differential mortality and fertility, 39; differential susceptibility to disease, 39; adaptability of human organism, 40; racial and individual differences, 40; overlapping of variable types, 40; method of description of types, 41; variability of physical and psychological functions, 42; significance of types, 43; eugenics, 43; nature and nurture, 44; local types as phenotypes, 45; hereditary anomalies, 46; hereditary and congenital traits, 47; development of types during period of growth, 48; comparison of European types and their American descendants, 49; influence of environment upon growth, 50; race mixture, 51; development of dentition, 52; continued observations during period of growth, 53; study of fraternities, 54; variability of mixed types, 55; interpretation of correlations, 56; differentiation between genetic and environmental influences, 58

Changes in head measurements and stature, 60; variability of children of dissimilar parents, 63; relation between size of family and stature of children, 63; decrease in width of face of children of immigrants, 65; period of maturity, 66; darkening of hair with increasing age, 66; changes in type of European urban populations, 69; effect of cradling upon head form, 69; effect of city life upon bodily form, 71; change in head form of Armenians, 74

Classification of European types, 76; permanence of local types, 77; effect of environment upon growth, 78; distribution of variability of head form in Italy, 78; head forms of Puerto Ricans, 80

Comparison between bodily form of parents and children, 82; degree of similarity dependent upon length of the period in which environment can influence measurements, 83

Rate of growth of siblings is partly genetically determined

Variability of moments when definite physiological changes in bodily development occur, 89; rate of development and decay dependent upon genetic and environmental causes, 90; observations on rats, 92; tempo of development partly genetically determined, 92; relation between period of development and of senescence, 93

General characteristics of curve of growth, 95; comparison of rate of growth of males and females, 96; chronological age and physiological age, 97; relation between physiological age and grading in schools, 98; influence of environment upon growth, 100; development of racial traits, 102

Relation between mental and physical growth, 104; asymmetry of growth curve, 105; increase of variability during the period of most rapid growth, 106; retarded and accelerated growth, 106; comparison of growth of short and tall children, 108; effect of social environment upon growth, 108; tempo of development, 112; interrelation between various phases of physiological development, 113; difference in growth curves of males and females, 114; period of maximum rate of growth, 115; relative effect of hereditary stature and tempo of development, 120; change of type between 1909 and 1937, 121; increase in stature between 1905 and 1930, 122; comparison of growth of general population and children in private schools, 123; influence of institutional life upon growth, 125; comparison of growth of various racial groups, 127; annual increments in stature of Negro and White girls, 128

Construction of ideal types, 131; analysis of population according to descent and environment, 132; acceleration and retardation of development, 133; effect of mixture of types upon correlations of measurements, 134; analysis of the concept of type, 135

Fertility of half-blood Indian, 138; stature of half-blood Indians, 140; growth of half-blood children, 142; breadth of face of Indians and half-bloods, 143; growth of breadth of face of Indians, half-bloods and Whites, 145; breadth of nose of Indians and half-bloods, 146; length of head of Indians and half-bloods, 148

Races and types, 149; relation of race and language, 150; relative importance of morphological description and measurements, 150; relation between individual and type, 151; sameness of type as a proof of common descent, 152; geographical considerations in the comparison of human types, 152; the position of the American race, 154

The three principal types of Europe, 155; causes of the distribution of types, 155; explanation of distribution of types based upon these causes, 156; economic attractiveness of habitat regulating distribution of types, 156; mixture of types, 157; the position of the European race, 157; social selection, 158; value of cephalic index for classification, 158; value of cephalic index and pigmentation for classification of racial types, 159

Metrical values as a means of classification of racial types, 160; stability of cephalic index, 161; influence of domestication upon bodily form, 161; Mendelian inheritance, 161; the variability of metric values and the classification of tribes according to metric values, 162; distribution of types determined by a few measurements compared with classification based on other traits, 163; race and culture, 164

Description of human types largely based on skeletal material, 165; variability of types, 166; permanence of types within a race, 167; comparison between parents and children, 167; the functions of measurements in description of types, 169; statistical methods, 170; homogeneity and heterogeneity of series expressed in measurements, 170; reconstruction of prehistoric types, 171

Value of physical anthropology in reconstruction of history of local types, 172; relation between taxonomy and genetic relationship, 172; impossibility of reconstructing constituent types of a population, 173; definition of type, 173; the genetic lines constituting a population, 173; relation between bodily form and mental characteristics, 175

Average and variability as means for differentiating types of populations, 176; types defined as variables, 177; difference between a constant and a variable, 177; statistical data purely descriptive, interpretation to be based on biological considerations, 179; genetic constitution of individuals of equal measurements not necessarily the same, 180

The problem of defining differences between various types, 181; arbitrary character of classifications based on metric characteristics, 182; a variable population must be studied as a whole, 183; difference between types cannot be defined as arithmetical difference, 184; methods of measuring degree of dissimilarity, 184; the coefficient of correlation not a measure of similarity, 185; dissimilarity of populations conceived as probability of recognizing an individual as belonging to his own group, 186; analysis of anthropometric series, 189

A theoretical discussion proving that two correlated phenomena do not need to be causally related, and showing that the correlations between local types and their cultural traits are no proof of causal relation

LANGUAGE

Historical review, 199; methods of recording, 200; texts written by natives, 201; classification of American languages, 202; genetic relationships, 202; mutual influences, 202; difficulties due to lack of knowledge of earlier stages of primitive languages, 204; studies of dialects, 205; phonetic processes, 205; value of American languages to general linguistics, 206; categories in American languages, 206; word and sentence in American languages, 208; literary styles, 208; types of literature in American languages, 209; native poetry, 210

Genetic classifications, 211; morphological similarities of apparently unrelated languages, 212; recent expansion of languages, 212; geographical distribution of phonetic traits, 213; geographical distribution of morphological types, 213; geographical distribution of vocabularies, 214; relation between vocabulary and morphological character, 214; mutual influences of languages in primitive society, 215; problem of distribution of similar categories among apparently unrelated languages, 215

In how far may two primitive languages influence each other, 219; assimilation of phonetic character of a Sahaptin language by a Salish language, 219; change of syntax in American languages under foreign influences, 220; vocalic harmony in neighboring unrelated languages, 221; distribution of pronominal gender on the North Pacific Coast, 221; analogous phonetic changes in neighboring languages, 221; characteristics of demonstrative pronouns in neighboring languages, 223; comparison between Chukchee and Eskimo, 224; problem of mixed languages in Africa, 225

Active and static verbs, 226; close association of ideas expressed by contraction, 226; misinterpretation of etymologies, 227; consonantic sound symbolism, 228; demonstrative pronoun in various American languages, 229

CULTURE

Beginnings of anthropology, 243; biological, psychological and cultural history of mankind, 244; biological history of mankind, 245; effects of domestication, 246; occurrence of parallel development, 246; relation between racial type and culture, 247; significance of archaeological finds for interpreting the mental development of man, 248; lack of relation between physical type and cultural development, 249; interpretation of psychological tests, 250; methods of studying the history of culture, 250; diffusion of culture, 251; independent development of cultural traits, 252; unilinear development of culture, 254; dynamics of culture, 255; geographical determinism, 255; economic determinism, 256; laws of cultural development, 257; relations between individual and culture, 258

Social laws, 260; social life of animals, 261; general traits of human society, 261; their special forms, 262; similar forms due to convergent development, 263; race and culture, 265; geographical environment and culture, 265; economic conditions and culture, 266; problem of general laws of integration of culture, 267; individual and culture, 268

Psychological unity of mankind, 270; influence of geographic environment on culture, 272; elementary ideas, 272; convergent development of cultural forms, 273; historical development of culture, 275; methods of investigating history of culture, 276; dissemination of culture, 277

Evolutionary and historical methods, 281; psychological versus historical explanation of parallel cultural phenomena, 282; classification interpreted as a historical sequence, 283; similarity of cultural traits ascribed to historical connections, 283; historical analysis of cultures, 283; dissemination of culture, 284; dynamics of culture, 285; stability of cultural traits, 286; analysis of similar cultural forms, 287; sequence of inventions, 287; development of rationalism, 288; psycho-analysis, 288

Classification of cultural forms interpreted as historical sequence, 290; methods of diffusion, 291; study of survivals, 292; development of family organization, 292; multiple origin of similar cultural traits, 293

Critique of sources, 295; investigation of purpose, meaning and significance of unique phenomena, 296; relations between tales and rituals, 296; convergence, 297; limited number of possible forms of certain cultural phenomena, 299; varied psychological causes for similar social phenomena, 299; incongruities in culture, 301

Definition of history, 305; structural relations between cultural phenomena, 306; relations between America and the Old World, 309; the use of statistics in ethnology, 309; methods of physical anthropology, 309; the uniqueness of cultural phenomena, 311

The inter-relation between esoteric and exoteric doctrines

Ethnic phenomena and psychological laws, 317; apparent sameness of ethnic phenomena, 317; totemism, 318; definition of totemism, 319; supernatural relation of man to nature, 319; characterization of kinship groups, 320; totemism an expression of the combination of these two ideas, 320; characterization of social units, 320; recognition of kinship groups by kinship terminology, 320; cohesion of kinship group dependent upon terminology, 321; unilateral descent, 321; limitation of number of kinship lines in tribes with unilateral descent, 322

Man’s appearance in America, 324; variety of types in America, 325; languages of America, 326; beginnings of agriculture in Central America, 327; basketry and pottery, 327; ceremonialism, 328; advance of culture in Central America and South America, 327; relations between Northwestern America and Asia, 329; isolation of the extreme south of South America, 329; independence of American achievements from Old World achievements, 330

The marginal tribes of America, 332; antiquity of the marginal areas, 333; the Iroquois tribes, 334; Algonquian tribes, 335; the Athapascan tribes, 335; the Salishan tribes, 336; the relation between America and Asia, 337; totemism of Northwest America, 339; theory of totemism, 340; cultural areas in Canada, 341; special problems of investigation, 342

Origin of man in the Old World, 344; the American race part of the Mongoloid race, 345; geological conditions in Bering Sea, 345; possibility of migration across the Pacific Ocean, 346; attempts to prove relations between America, Melanesia and Australia, 346; cultivated plants of America and the Old World, 347; antiquity of man in America, 348; fundamental differences between America and the Old World, 350; circum-polar culture traits, 350; circum-polar rituals, 352; relations between North and South America, 352; languages of Siberia and America, 353

Definition of tribe, 356; divisions of tribe, 357; changing composition of tribes, 359; ranking positions, 360; privileges, 360; assignment of individual to tribal division, 360; preference for paternal line, 362; transfer of privileges, 362; marriage ceremonies, 365; officers, 365; relation of Kwakiutl society to that of neighboring tribes, 366; relation to matrilineal descent to northern tribes, 367; terminology of relationship, 368; form of totemism, 368

Exogamy of northern tribes, 371; tendency to endogamy among the Bella Bella, 373; terminology of relationship of Bella Bella, 373; preference for matrilineal descent, 373; village communities, 374; tendency to endogamy of the Bella Coola, 375; social organization of the Bella Bella, 376

Origin of the secret societies among the Kwakiutl, 379; relation between membership in secret societies and family descent, 380; foreign tales associated with ritual, 381; relation of secret societies to war, 383; modern changes in ceremony, 383

Principles of classification, 384; terminology, 386; joking relationship, 392; respect relationship, 392; behavior among relatives, 392; marriage regulations, 394; psychological basis of avunculate, 395

Local characteristics of tales, 397; characteristics of plots, 399; dissemination of complex tales, 400; hero myths, 401; characterization of animals, 401; psychological connection between parts of complex myths, 402; supernatural elements in tales, 403; relationship between mythology and folk-tales, 405; imaginative character of incidents, 405; association of tales with phenomena of nature, 406

Culture heroes, 407; development of concept of selfish transformer, 412; contests between transformers, 416; foreign elements in transformer myths, 417; influence of social organization upon folk-tales, 422; interpretation of myths, 423

The Raven Tale, 426; geographical distribution of elements of tales, 425; relations of North-west Coast mythology to that of the Plains Indians, 428; continuity of distribution of similar tales, 430; linguistic proof of relationships of myths, 431; recent origin of tales of acquisition of crests, 432; independent origin of ideas, 434; dissemination of ideas, 435

Independent origin or dissemination, 437; distribution of the tale of the Dog-Children, 438; the Deluge legend, 439; story of the man who recovered his eye-sight, 441; relation of tales from the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, 442; the Star Husband, 442; the obstacle myth, 443

Criticism of the attempt to find a systematic interpretation of mythology

Review of published material, 451; translations and originals, 452; definitions of myth and folk-tale, 454; the mythical period, 455; history of tales, 456; origin of common traits of mythologies, 457; dissemination of tales, 458; similarities of Melanesian and American tales, 461; tales common to Old and New World, 462; modern European tales in America, 462; mythological areas, 465; characteristic traits of American folk-tales, 467; transformation tales characteristic of America, 468; creation tales of California, 468; explanatory elements in folk-tales, 469; systematization of unconnected tales, 470; Trickster tales, 472; identification of Trickster and Transformer, 474; folk-tales dealing with human society, 475; cultural setting, 475; mythical concepts and myths, 476; magical machinery, 477; characterization of individuals, 478; literary style, 479; folk-tales not based on observations of nature, 480; originality of tribes, 481; influence of priests in systematization of mythology, 482; mythological concepts in folk-tales, 483; personification of nature, 484; animal tales, 485; novelistic character of tales, 485; identification of the heroes of tales with the moon, 486; the nightmare as basis of mythological tales, 487; imaginative exaggeration a source of mythological concepts, 488; diverse origins of sacred numbers, 489; diverse origin of tales of the origin of death, 490

Rhythmic repetition, 490; rhythmic character of formal prose, 492; rhythmic repetition in poetry, 494; the proverb, 495; ritual, 495; the animal tale, 495; epic poetry, 496; independence of literary form of racial descent, 496; reflections of cultural life in literature, 498; descriptions of nature, 500; metaphor, 500; diversity of style in the literature of a single tribe, 502

Origin stories, 504; anecdotes accounting for origin of animals, 506; absence of mythological period, 507; complex animal stories borrowed from Indians, 508; animals as human beings, 510; hero tales, 510; conservatism of Eskimo exhibited in folk-lore, 511; retention of historical facts, 512; fabulous tribes, 512; tales of quarrels, 513; tales of shamans, 514

French tales, 517; Portuguese and Spanish tales, 518; relations between Negro, Spanish and Portuguese tales, 519; relation to Philippine tales, 521; integration of tales of romance origin in Indian tales, 522; Biblical tales, 523

Relation between archaeology and ethnological problems, 525; archaeology of southern British Columbia as evidence of migrations, 528; the distribution of pottery in North-west America, 529

Evidence of sequence of cultures in the valley of Mexico

Relation between virtuosity and geometric design, 535; relation between virtuosity and representative art, 536; problem of representing three-dimensional objects on a surface, 537; methods of presenting human form, 538; symbolic representations, 538

Classification of forms misinterpreted as historical sequence, 541; explanation of decorative motifs as derived from the armadillo, 542; decorative motifs derived from alligator, 544

Theories of the development of decorative design, 546; decorative style of ceremonial objects and articles employed for everyday use, 547; origin and interpretation of geometric decoration, 553; relation of art of the Plains Indians to that of the Pueblos, 558; lack of agreement between style of interpretation and that of form, 560

Theories of origin of ornament, 564; significance of Alaskan needlecases for theoretical discussions, 565; general characteristics of form in ornamentation, 566; characteristic Eskimo motifs, 569; their ornaments in tattooing, 570; their distribution in Eastern Asia, 570; needlecases from Eastern Arctic America, 571; antiquity of design, 573; modifications of geometric designs, 576; addition of representative forms, 577; transformation of flanges into animal forms, 579; further development of animal designs, 581; further modifications of form, 583; modification of formal elements suggesting animal forms, 588; series beginning with simple forms and ending with complex forms do not necessarily represent historical development, 589; style only partly dependent upon technique, 589; virtuosity and style, 591; interpretation of geometric designs, 592

The distribution of forms suggests migration of the Eskimo by way of north Greenland to the east coast of Greenland

Evolutionary theories, 596; Tylor’s theory of multiple souls, 597; qualities conceived as concrete objects, 598; sin as a concrete object, 599; life, 599; memory image, 600; length of existence of the soul does not coincide with the span of life, 601; pre-existence, 601; immortality, 601; characteristics of the memory image, 602; ghosts, 603; the abode of the soul, 604; conditions of soul after death, 605

The supernatural, 612; the profane, 614; supernatural beings, 614; ghosts, 615; the soul, 615; purification, 616; taboos, 617

MISCELLANEOUS

Scope of anthropology, 621; anthropology in the university curriculum, 622; anthropometry, 623; linguistics, 623; archaeology, 624; relation to sociology, 624; relation to other sciences, 624

Early descriptions of primitive people, 626; history of culture, 628; dissemination of culture, 628; distribution of human types, 629; history and distribution of languages, 630; conservatism in culture, 632; relation of primitive culture to modern civilization, 633; laws of development of culture, 634; history of the family, 635; knowledge of foreign cultures necessary for understanding of our own culture, 636; independent origin of similar cultural traits, 636; relation of anthropology to other sciences, 638

Geography a descriptive science, 639; relation to geology, meteorology, biology and ethnology, 640; conflicting views of naturalists and historians treating geographical subjects, 641; conflict between interest in generalization and in understanding phenomena as such, 641; logical and aesthetic interests involved, 643; in geography the center of interest is the geographical phenomenon as a whole, 643

ILLUSTRATIONS

CHANGES IN BODILY FORM OF DESCENDANTS OF IMMIGRANTS

THE TEMPO OF GROWTH OF FRATERNITIES

GROWTH

THE HALF-BLOOD INDIAN

THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE KWAKIUTL

RELATIONSHIP SYSTEM OF THE VANDAU

THE DECORATIVE ART OF THE NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS

DECORATIVE DESIGNS OF ALASKAN NEEDLECASES

THE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE ESKIMOS OF EAST GREENLAND

RACE

RACE AND PROGRESS[1]

Permit me to call your attention to the scientific aspects of a problem that has been for a long time agitating our country and which, on account of its social and economic implications, has given rise to strong emotional reactions and has led to varied types of legislation. I refer to the problems due to the intermingling of racial types.

If we wish to reach a reasonable attitude, it is necessary to separate clearly the biological and psychological aspects from the social and economic implications of this problem. Furthermore, the social motivation of what is happening must be looked at not from the narrow point of view of our present conditions but from a wider angle.

The facts with which we are dealing are diverse. The plantation system of the South brought to our shores a large Negro population. Considerable mixture between White masters and slave women occurred during the period of slavery, so that the number of pure Negroes was dwindling continually and the colored population gradually became lighter. A certain amount of intermingling between White and Indian took place, but in the United States and Canada this has never occurred to such a degree that it became an important social phenomenon. In Mexico and many parts of Central and South America it is the most typical case of race contact and race mixture. With the development of immigration the people of eastern and southern Europe were attracted to our country and form now an important part of our population. They differ in type somewhat among themselves, although the racial contrasts are much less than those between Indians or Negroes and Whites. Through Mexican and West Indian immigration another group has come into our country, partly of South European, partly of mixed Negro and mixed Indian descent. To all these must be added the East Asiatic groups, Chinese, Japanese and Filipinos, who play a particularly important rôle on the Pacific Coast.

The first point in regard to which we need clarification refers to the significance of the term race. In common parlance when we speak of a race we mean a group of people that have certain bodily and perhaps also mental characteristics in common. The Whites, with their light skin, straight or wavy hair and high nose, are a race set off clearly from the Negroes with their dark skin, frizzly hair and flat nose. In regard to these traits the two races are fundamentally distinct. Not quite so definite is the distinction between East Asiatics and European types, because transitional forms do occur among normal White individuals, such as flat faces, straight black hair and eye forms resembling the East Asiatic types; and conversely European-like traits are found among East Asiatics. For Negro and White we may speak of hereditary racial traits so far as these radically distinct features are concerned. For Whites and East Asiatics the difference is not quite so absolute, because a few individuals may be found in each race for whom the racial traits do not hold good, so that in a strict sense we cannot speak of absolutely valid hereditary racial traits.

This condition prevails to a much more marked extent among the different, so-called races of Europe. We are accustomed to speak of a Scandinavian as tall, blond and blue-eyed, of a South Italian as short, swarthy and dark-eyed; of a Bohemian as middle-sized, with brown or gray eyes and wide face and straight hair. We are apt to construct ideal local types which are based on our everyday experience, abstracted from a combination of forms that are most frequently seen in a given locality, and we forget that there are numerous individuals for whom this description does not hold true. It would be a rash undertaking to determine the locality in which a person is born solely from his bodily characteristics. In many cases we may be helped in such a determination by manners of wearing the hair, peculiar mannerisms of motion, and by dress, but these are not to be mistaken for essential hereditary traits. In populations of various parts of Europe many individuals may be found that may as well belong to one part of the continent as to another. There is no truth in the contention so often made that two Englishmen are more alike in bodily form than, let us say, an Englishman and a German. A greater number of forms may be duplicated in the narrower area, but similar forms may be found in all parts of the continent. There is an overlapping of bodily form between the local groups. It is not justifiable to assume that the individuals that do not fit into the ideal local type which we construct from general impressions are foreign elements in the population, that their presence is always due to intermixture with alien types. It is a fundamental characteristic of all local populations that the individuals differ among themselves, and a closer study shows that this is true of animals as well as of men. It is, therefore, not quite proper to speak in these cases of traits that are hereditary in the racial type as a whole, because too many of them occur also in other racial types. Hereditary racial traits should be shared by the whole population so that it is set off against others.

The matter is quite different when individuals are studied as members of their own family lines. Racial heredity implies that there must be a unity of descent, that there must have existed at one time a small number of ancestors of definite bodily form, from whom the present population has descended. It is quite impossible to reconstruct this ancestry through the study of a modern population, but the study of families extending over several generations is often possible. Whenever this study has been undertaken we find that the family lines represented in a single population differ very much among themselves. In isolated communities where the same families have intermarried for generations the differences are less than in larger communities. We may say that every racial group consists of a great many family lines which are distinct in bodily form. Some of these family lines are duplicated in neighboring territories and the more duplication exists the less is it possible to speak of fundamental racial characteristics. These conditions are so manifest in Europe that all we can do is to study the frequency of occurrence of various family lines all over the continent. The differences between the family lines belonging to each larger area are much greater than the differences between the populations as a whole.

Although it is not necessary to consider the great differences in type that occur in a population as due to mixture of different types, it is easy to see that intermingling has played an important part in the history of modern populations. Let us recall to our minds the migrations that occurred in early times in Europe, when the Kelts of Western Europe swept over Italy and eastward to Asia Minor; when the Teutonic tribes migrated from the Black Sea westward into Italy, Spain and even into North Africa; when the Slav expanded northeastward over Russia, and southward into the Balkan Peninsula; when the Moors held a large part of Spain, when Roman and Greek slaves disappeared in the general population, and when Roman colonization affected a large part of the Mediterranean area. It is interesting to note that Spain’s greatness followed the period of greatest race mixture, that its decline set in when the population became stable and immigration stopped. This might give us pause when we speak about the dangers of the intermingling of European types. What is happening in America now is the repetition on a larger scale and in a shorter time of what happened in Europe during the centuries when the people of northern Europe were not yet firmly attached to the soil.

The actual occurrence of intermingling leads us to consider what the biological effect of intermixture of different types may be. Much light has been shed on this question through the intensive study of the phenomena of heredity. It is true we are hampered in the study of heredity in man by the impossibility of experimentation, but much can be learned from observation and through the application of studies of heredity in animals and plants. One fact stands out clearly. When two individuals are mated and there is a very large number of offspring and when furthermore there is no disturbing environmental factor, then the distribution of different forms in the offspring is determined by the genetic characteristics of the parents. What may happen after thousands of generations have passed does not concern us here.

Our previous remarks regarding the characteristics of local types show that matings between individuals essentially different in genetic type must occur in even the most homogeneous population. If it could be shown, as is sometimes claimed, that the progeny of individuals of decidedly distinct proportions of the body would be what has been called disharmonic in character, this would occur with considerable frequency in every population, for we do find individuals, let us say, with large jaws and large teeth and those with small jaws and small teeth. If it is assumed that in the later offspring these conditions might result in a combination of small jaws and large teeth a disharmony would develop. We do not know that this actually occurs. It merely illustrates the line of reasoning. In matings between various European groups these conditions would not be materially changed, although greater differences between parents would be more frequent than in a homogeneous population.

The essential question to be answered is whether we have any evidence that would indicate that matings between individuals of different descent and different type would result in a progeny less vigorous than that of their ancestors. We have not had any opportunity to observe any degeneracy in man as clearly due to this cause. The high nobility of all parts of Europe can be shown to be of very mixed origin. French, German and Italian urban populations are derived from all the distinct European types. It would be difficult to show that any degeneracy that may exist among them is due to an evil effect of intermating. Biological degeneracy is found rather in small districts of intense inbreeding. Here again it is not so much a question of type, but of the presence of pathological conditions in the family strains, for we know of many perfectly healthy and vigorous intensely inbred communities. We find these among the Eskimos and also among many primitive tribes among whom cousin marriages are prescribed by custom.

These remarks do not touch upon the problem of the effect of intermarriages upon bodily form, health and vigor of crosses between races that are biologically more distinct than the types of Europe. It is not quite easy to give absolutely conclusive evidence in regard to this question. Judging merely on the basis of anatomical features and health conditions of mixed populations there does not seem to be any reason to assume unfavorable results, either in the first or in later generations of offspring. The mixed descendants of Europeans and American Indians are taller and more fertile than the pureblood Indians. They are even taller than either parental race. The mixed blood Dutch and Hottentot of South Africa and the Malay mixed bloods of the Island of Kisar are in type intermediate between the two races, and do not exhibit any traits of degeneracy. The populations of the Sudan, mixtures of Mediterranean and Negro types, have always been characterized by great vigor. There is also little doubt that in eastern Russia a considerable infusion of Asiatic blood has occurred. The biological observations on our North American mulattoes do not convince us that there is any deleterious effect of race mixture so far as it is evident in anatomical form and function.

It is also necessary to remember that in varying environment human forms are not absolutely stable, and many of the anatomical traits of the body are subject to a limited amount of change according to climate and conditions of life. We have definite evidence showing changes of bodily size. The stature in European populations has increased materially since the middle of the nineteenth century. War and starvation have left their effects upon the children growing up in the second decade of our century. Proportions of the body change with occupation. The forms of the hand of the laborer and that of the musician reflect their occupations. The changes in head form that have been observed are analogous to those observed in animals under varying conditions of life, among lions born in captivity or among rats fed with different types of diet. The extent to which geographical and social environment may change bodily form is not known, but the influences of outer conditions have to be taken into consideration when comparing different human types.

Selective processes are also at work in changing the character of a population. Differential birth-rate, mortality and migration may bring about changes in the hereditary composition of a group. The range of such changes is limited by the range of variation within the original population. The importance of selection upon the character of a population is easily overestimated. It is true enough that certain defects are transmitted by heredity, but it cannot be proved that a whole population degenerates physically by the numerical increase of degenerates. These always include the physically unfit, and others, the victims of circumstances. The economic depression of our days shows clearly how easily perfectly competent individuals may be brought into conditions of abject poverty and under stresses that only the most vigorous minds can withstand successfully. Equally unjustified is the opinion that war, the struggle between national groups, is a selective process which is necessary to keep mankind on the onward march. Sir Arthur Keith, only a week ago, in his rectoral address at the University of Aberdeen is reported to have said that Nature keeps her human orchard healthy by pruning and war is her pruning hook. I do not see how such a statement can be justified in any way. War eliminates the physically strong, war increases all the devastating scourges of mankind such as tuberculosis and genital diseases, war weakens the growing generation. History shows that energetic action of masses may be released not only by war but also by other forces. We may not share the fervor or believe in the stimulating ideals; the important point is to observe that they may arouse the same kind of energy that is released in war. Such a stimulus was the abandonment to religion in the middle ages, such is the abandonment of modern Russian youths to their ideal.

So far we have discussed the effects of heredity, environment and selection upon bodily form. We are not so much concerned with the form of the body as with its functions, for in the life of a nation the activities of the individual count rather than his appearance. There is no doubt in my mind that there is a very definite association between the biological make-up of the individual and the physiological and psychological functioning of his body. The claim that only social and other environmental conditions determine the reactions of the individual disregards the most elementary observations, like differences in heart beat, basal metabolism or gland development; and mental differences in their relation to extreme anatomical disturbances of the nervous system. There are organic reasons why individuals differ in their mental behavior.

But to acknowledge this fact does not mean that all differences of behavior can be adequately explained on a purely anatomical basis. When the human body has reached maturity, its form remains fairly stable until the changes due to increasing age set in. Under normal conditions the form and the chemical constitution of the adult body remain almost stable for a number of years. Not so with bodily functions. The conditions of life vary considerably. Our heart beat is different in sleep and in waking. It depends upon the work we are doing, the altitude in which we live, and upon many other factors. It may, therefore, well be that the same individual under different conditions will show quite different reactions. It is the same with other bodily functions. The action of our digestive tract depends upon the quality and quantity of the food we consume. In short, the physiological reactions of the body are markedly adjusted to conditions of life. Owing to this many individuals of different organic structure when exposed to the same environmental conditions will assume a certain degree of similarity of reaction.

On the whole it is much easier to find decided differences between races in bodily form than in function. It cannot be claimed that the body in all races functions in an identical way, but that kind of overlapping which we observed in form is even more pronounced in function. It is quite impossible to say that, because some physical function, let us say the heart beat, has a certain measure, the individual must be White or Negro—for the same rates are found in both races. A certain basal metabolism does not show that a person is a Japanese or a White, although the averages of all the individuals in the races compared may exhibit differences. Furthermore, the particular function is so markedly modified by the demands made upon the organism that these will make the reactions of the racial groups living under the same conditions markedly alike. Every organ is capable of adjustment to a fairly wide range of conditions, and thus the conditions will determine to a great extent the kind of reaction.

What is true of physiological function is equally true of mental function. There exists an enormous amount of literature dealing with mental characteristics of races. The blond North-Europeans, South Italians, Jews, Negroes, Indians, Chinese have been described as though their mental characteristics were biologically determined. It is true, each population has a certain character that is expressed in its behavior, so that there is a geographical distribution of types of behavior. At the same time we have a geographical distribution of anatomical types, and as a result we find that a selected population can be described as having a certain anatomical type and a certain kind of behavior. This, however, does not justify us in claiming that the anatomical type determines behavior. A great error is committed when we allow ourselves to draw this inference. First of all it would be necessary to prove that the correlation between bodily form and behavior is absolute, that it is valid not only for the selected spot, but for the whole population of the given type, and, conversely, that the same behavior does not occur when the types of bodily build differ. Secondly, it would have to be shown that there is an inner relation between the two phenomena.

I might illustrate this by an example taken from an entirely different field. A particular country has a specific climate and particular geological formation. In the same country is found a certain flora. Nevertheless, the character of soil and climate does not explain the composition of the flora, except in so far as it depends upon these two factors. Its composition depends upon the whole historical evolution of plant forms all over the world. The single fact of an agreement of distribution does not prove a genetic relation between the two sets of observations. Negroes in Africa have long limbs and a certain kind of mental behavior. It does not follow that the long limbs are in any way the cause of their mental behavior. The very point to be proved is assumed as proved in this kind of argumentation.

A scientific solution of this problem requires a different line of approach. Mental activities are functions of the organism. We have seen that physiological functions of the same organism may vary greatly under varying conditions. Is the case of mental reactions different? While the study of cretins and of men of genius shows that biological differences exist which limit the type of individual behavior, this has little bearing upon the masses constituting a population in which great varieties of bodily structure prevail. We have seen that the same physiological functions occur in different races with varying frequency, but that no essential qualitative differences can be established. The question must be asked whether the same conditions prevail in mental life.

If it were possible to subject two populations of different type to the same outer conditions the answer would not be difficult. The obstacle in our way lies in the impossibility of establishing sameness of conditions. Investigators differ fundamentally in their opinion in regard to the question of what constitutes sameness of conditions, and our attention must be directed, therefore, to this question.

If we could show how people of exactly the same biological composition react in different types of environment, much might be gained. It seems to me that the data of history create a strong presumption in favor of material changes of mental behavior among peoples of the same genetic composition. The free and easy English of Elizabethan times contrast forcibly with the prudish Mid-Victorian; the Norse Viking and the modern Norwegian do not impress us as the same; the stern Roman republican and his dissolute descendant of imperial times present striking contrasts.

But we need more tangible evidence. At least in so far as intelligent reaction to simple problems of everyday life is concerned, we may bring forward a considerable amount of experimental evidence that deals with this problem. We do not need to assume that our modern intelligence tests give us a clue to absolutely biologically determined intelligence—whatever that may mean—they certainly do tell us how individuals react to simple, more or less unfamiliar, situations. At a first glance it would seem that very important racial differences are found. I refer to the many comparative tests of the intelligence of individuals of various European types and of Europeans and Negroes. North Europeans tested in our country were found as a whole decidedly superior to South Europeans, Europeans as a whole to Negroes. The question arises, what does this mean? If there is a real difference determined by race, we should find the same kind of difference between these racial types wherever they live. Professor Garth has recently collected the available evidence and reaches the conclusion that it is not possible to prove a difference due to genetic factors, that rather all the available observations may be easily explained as due to differences in social environment. It seems to me the most convincing proof of the correctness of this view has been given by Dr. Klineberg, who examined the various outstanding European types in urban and rural communities in Europe. He found that there is everywhere a marked contrast between rural and urban populations, the city giving considerably better results than the country and that furthermore the various groups do not follow by any means the same order in city and country; that the order rather depends upon social conditions, such as the excellence of the school systems and conflicts between home and school. Still more convincing are his observations on Negroes. He examined a considerable number of Negroes in southern cities who had moved to the city from rural districts. He found that the longer they lived in the city the better the results of the tests came to be, so that Negroes who had lived in the city for six years were far superior to those who had just moved to the city. He found the same result when studying Negroes who had moved from the south to New York, an improvement with the time of residence in New York. This result agrees with Brigham’s findings for Italians who had lived for varying periods in the United States. It has often been claimed, as was done in the beginning by Brigham, that such changes are due to a process of selection, that more poorly endowed individuals have migrated to the country in late years and represent the group that has just come to the city. It would be difficult to maintain this in view of the regularity with which this phenomenon reappears in every test. Still, Dr. Klineberg has also given definite evidence that selection does not account for these differences. He compared the records of the migrating groups with those who remained behind. The records collected in Nashville and Birmingham showed that there is no appreciable difference between the two groups. The migrants were even a little below those who stayed at home. He also found that the migrants who came to New York were slightly inferior to those who remained in the South.

I have given these data in some detail, because they show definitely that cultural environment is a most important factor in determining the results of the so-called intelligence tests. In fact, a careful examination of the tests shows clearly that in none of them has our cultural experience been eliminated. City life and country life, the South and the North present different types of cultural background to which we learn to adapt ourselves, and our reactions are determined by these adaptations, which are often so obscure that they can be detected only by a most intimate knowledge of the conditions of life. We have indications of such adaptations in other cases. It would seem that among the Plains Indians the experience of girls with bead work gives to them a superiority in handling tests based on form. It is highly desirable that the tests should be examined with greatest care in regard to the indirect influence of experience upon the results. I suspect strongly that such influences can always be discovered and that it will be found impossible to construct any test in which this element is so completely eliminated that we could consider the results as an expression of purely biologically determined factors.

It is much more difficult to obtain convincing results in regard to emotional reactions in different races. No satisfactory experimental method has been devised that would answer the crucial question, in how far cultural background and in how far the biological basis of personality is responsible for observed differences. There is no doubt that individuals do differ in this respect on account of their biological constitution. It is very questionable whether the same may be said of races, for in all races we find a wide range of different types of personality. All that we can say with certainty is that the cultural factor is of greatest importance and might well account for all the observed differences, although this does not preclude the possibility of biologically determined differences. The variety of response of groups of the same race but culturally different is so great that it seems likely that any existing biological differences are of minor importance. I can give only a few instances. The North American Indians are reputed as stoic, as ready to endure pain and torture without a murmur. This is true in all those cases in which culture demands repression of emotion. The same Indians, when ill, give in to hopeless depression. Among closely related Indian tribes certain ones are given to ecstatic orgies, while others enjoy