Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 62.djvu/184

178 loss upon his country. He is spoken of in the highest terms by all historians, especially for his bravery, prudence and magnanimity. Don John, a natural son of Philip IV., also was the possessor of great qualities.

It is noteworthy that three of these six were illegitimate, and that the greatest, Alexandre Farnese and Don John, were of these three. It seems probable that owing to the extremely high-strung and unstable condition of nearly all the members of the family, a union with an entirely different class of people would be of advantage to the health and balance of mind. It was not so much that ability was needed as a toning down of the excessiveness that had been manifesting itself in so many ways.

Of these mentioned, one was a son, two were grandsons, two were great-grandsons and one was a great-great-grandson. The most eminent were the closest related, and it is probable that the number of more distant relationship would not have been so large (as in the case of Galton's tables) but for the close intermarriages, giving the genius a chance to be further perpetuated than would ordinarily have been the case.

The kings of Spain never again had anything of the renowned abilities of Isabella, Charles, or the celebrated warriors of early days like Alfonso VI. (1126), James I. of Aragon, or John the Great of Portugal. It might have been that some of the eldest sons should have inherited the great qualities instead of little ones, but Spain may be said to have been unlucky in this, and as the next three, Philip II., III. and IV., did not get the best, in each succeeding generation the chances of its reappearing become more and more dim until the probabilities of a reversion were entirely unlikely.

Let us now notice the neuroses in this same region. The amount of insanity, or at least marked deviation from the normal, should be strikingly conspicuous owing to the intermarriages. It is so. Philip II. is described in this way by Motley.

He was believed to be the reverse of the Emperor (his father). Charles sought great enterprises, Philip would avoid them. . . . The son was reserved, cautious, suspicious of all men and capable of sacrificing a realm from hesitation and timidity. The father had a genius for action, the son a predeliction for repose. His talents were in truth very much below mediocrity. A petty passion for contemptible details characterized him from youth. . . diligent with great ambition. . . . He was grossly licentious and cruel.

Philip II. evidently took after his grandmother, Joanna 'the Mad,' who was weak and melancholic, and perhaps also his grandfather, the feeble Philip 'the Fair' of Austria. He did not resemble either his