Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 5.djvu/356

 342 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

remains belong almost uniformly to H. EuropcEus or to crosses between this race and other races occupying apparently a lower position in the social scale. On the other hand, it is only rarely that these sepultures contain individuals distinctly typical of races other than the dolichocephalic-blond. The subjects who do not belong to this race appear to be women taken from the inferior classes or from savage races living in juxtaposition to the Aryan civilization, half-breeds resulting from chance unions, and sometimes simply slaves put to death to accompany their masters in the other world. Apart from such cases of joint interment, the representatives, probably more numerous than is often supposed, of the slaves of foreign race, and of savages living on the confines of the relative civilization of the Aryans, do not appear to have practiced modes of burial capable of transmitting their bones to us. I may cite, as a typical example, H. contractus, the rigorously pure examples of which are all feminine. We reach, then, the conclusion that the dominant class among the primitive Aryans was dolicho-blond. Whether that

latter, and even in this point the analogy in cephalic index is not accompanied by an analogous form of skull.

Tappeiner, who is the authority on the ultra-brachycephalics of the eastern Alps, has made a special study of this question. The conclusions of his work are categori- cal {Der etiropdische Mensch und die Tirohr, Meran, 1S96) : *' Ich habe bei der anthropologischen Untersuchung der 3,400 lebenden hochbrachycephalen Tiroler keinen einzigen Mann gefunden, welcher die charakteristichen Merkmale der mon- golischen Rasse an sich gehabt hat (p. 42). So wird auch der weitere Schluss nicht bezweifelt werden konnen, dass alle europaischen brachycephalen Schadel wesentlich verschieden von den mongolischen Schadelh sind, dass also die europaischen Brachy- cephalen keine Nachkommen der Mongolen sein konnen, und dass daher eine prdhi- storische Einwanderung von Mongolen aus Asien ein anthropologischer Irrthum ist" (p. 48; cf. also p. 53).

To this testimony of Tappeiner, based on his study of 3,400 living subjects and 927 skulls, I may add my own, which rests on about equally extensive studies in the C^vennes. I have not found a single subject of the Mongolian type. The reader may be referred for details to my Matlriaux pour I' Anthropologic de I'Aveyron and Recherches sur I^^ ultra-brackycephales de gj a 100 et plus. I may say, further, that I have been unable to find any Mongolian types among ancient skulls of brachycephalic Europeans preserved in the museums.

The question has, moreover, of late taken a new turn. The anthropological researches in Russia, in the Caucasus, in eastern Siberia, and in Turkestan have not yet furnished a single Mongolian skull anterior to the Huns, the Turks, and the Tar- tars. The arrival of the yellow brachycephalics in central Asia does not appear to