Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 5.djvu/279

 REVIEIVS 265

Europe. The modern nations of Europe are compounds of these three racial elements, and the geographical distribution of the racial characters seems to follow definite laws. But here enters one of the greatest difficulties of an investigation like this of Dr. Ripley's : it is often extremely difficult to determine whether the physical character- istics of a population are due to the race of the inhabitants or to the action of environment. With the present inadequacy of our knowledge of the effect of environment upon physical growth and of heredity, we cannot help feeling a suspicion, in many cases, of conclu- sions drawn from a few physical characters. We hasten to say, how- ever, that Dr. Ripley has more thoroughly examined all the data extant than anyone else, and that he has shown a rare caution in submitting his conclusions. In spite of acknowledged difficulties, he has not only mapped out the racial geography of the continent in considerable detail, but he has also been able to show the direct and indirect rela- tions, in many cases, between this racial distribution and the food con- ditions.

Although a large part of Dr. Ripley's book is taken up with anthro- pological details, the real object of the book is to analyze two of the fundamental elements of the social phenomena of European develop- ment — the element of race and the element of environment. From this point of view, he has done what many another writer has failed to do : he has recognized, in the first place, the extreme complexity of social phenomena viewed as a whole; in the second place, with refer- ence to the particular elements of the problem which he has set out to study — race and environment — he has been able to give each factor its due in relation to the general problem. The social philosophy which attributes everything to environment is a back number : environ- ment is only one of the conditions. But the anthropologist who, on the other hand, would attribute everything to race is just as greatly in error. The question has become much like that with reference to the superiority of one or other of the sexes ; sides have been taken in the discussion, only to find that there is no room for comparison between the two. In his two chapters on " Social Problems " the author has done much to put this question in its right light. While recog- nizing the fundamental influence of temperament, he points out the fallacy into which many recent writers have fallen of attributing to race alone the social phenomena which are characteristic of the habitat of that race. His theory is " that most of the social phenomena we have noted [frequency of divorce, suicide, etc.], as peculiar to the areas