the geographical agencies of Timbuctoo, would have developed
into negroes might now, after a protracted exposure to the conditions
of Hamburg, never become negroes if transplanted to Timbuctoo.
[7] Study of Sociology, pages 33-35.
[8] No! not even though they were bodily brothers! The geographical
factor utterly vanishes before the ancestral factor. The difference
between Hamburg and Timbuctoo as a cause of ultimate divergence of two
races is as nothing to the difference of constitution of the ancestors
of the two races, even though as in twin brothers, this difference
might be invisible to the naked eye. No two couples of the most
homogeneous race could possibly be found so identical as, if set in
identical environments, to give rise to two identical lineages. The
minute divergence at the start grows broader with each generation, and
ends with entirely dissimilar breeds.
[9] Article 'Nation Making,' in Gentleman's Magazine, 1878. I quote
from the reprint in the Popular Science Monthly Supplement December,
1878, pages 121, 123, 126.
[10] Article 'Hellas,' in Gentleman's Magazine, 1878. Reprint in
Popular Science Monthly Supplement, September, 1878.
[11] Vol. cxiii. p. 318 (October, 1871).
[12] I am well aware that in much that follows (though in nothing that
precedes) I seem to be crossing the heavily shotted bows of Mr. Galton,
for whose laborious investigations into the heredity of genius I have
the greatest respect. Mr. Galton inclines to think that genius of
intellect and passion is bound to express itself, whatever the outward
opportunity, and that within any given race an equal number of geniuses
of each grade must needs be born in every equal period of time; a
subordinate race cannot possibly engender a large number of high-class
geniuses, etc. He would, I suspect, infer the suppositions I go on to
make--of great men fortuitously assembling around a given epoch and
making it great, and of their being fortuitously absent from certain
places and times (from Sardinia, from Boston now, etc.)--to be
radically vicious. I hardly think, however, that he does justice to
the great complexity of the conditions of _effective_ greatness, and to
the way in which the physiological averages of production may be masked
entirely during long periods, either by the accidental mortality of
geniuses in infancy, or by the fact that the particular geniuses born
happened not to find tasks. I doubt the truth of his
|