rachycephalic skulls in the
same tomb, at once jump to the conclusion that they must have belonged
to two different races. When, for instance, two dolichocephalic and
three brachycephalic skulls were discovered in the same tomb at
Alexanderpol, we were told at once that this proved nothing as to the
simultaneous occurrence of different skulls in the same family; nay,
that it proved the very contrary of what it might seem to prove. It
was clear, we were assured, that the two dolichocephalic skulls
belonged to Aryan chiefs and the three brachycephalic skulls to their
non-Aryan slaves, who were killed and buried with their masters,
according to a custom well known to Herodotus. This sounded very
learned, but was it really quite straightforward? Besides the general
division of skulls into dolichocephalic, brachycephalic, and
mesocephalic, other divisions had been undertaken, according to the
height of the skull, and again according to the maxillary and the
facial angles. This latter division gave us orthognatic, prognathic,
and mesognathic skulls. Lastly, according to the peculiar character of
the hair, we might distinguish two great divisions, the people with
woolly hair (Ulotriches) and people with smooth hair (Lissotriches).
The former were subdivided into Lophocomi, people with tufts of hair,
and Eriocomi, or people with fleecy hair. The latter were divided into
Euthycomi, straight haired, and Euplocomi, wavy haired. It had been
shown that these peculiarities of the hair depended on the peculiar
form of the hair tubes, which in cross sections were found to be
either round or elongated in different ways. All these classifications,
to which several more might be added, those according to the orbits of
the eyes, the outlines of the nose, and the width of the pelvis, were
by themselves extremely useful. But few of them only, if any, ran
strictly parallel. Now let them consider whether there could be any
organic connection between the shape of the skull, the facial angle,
the conformation of the hair, or the color of the skin on one side,
and what we called the great families of language on the other.

CONNECTION OF LANGUAGE AND PHYSICAL CONFORMATION.

That we spoke at all might rightly be called a work of nature, _opera
naturale_, as Dante said long ago; but that we spoke thus or thus,
_cosi o cosi_, that, as the same Dante said, depended on our
pleasure--that was our work. To imagine, therefore, that as a matter
of nec