We are indeed too apt to apply our own artificial standards as the sole

test of intellectual vigour; whereas it is probable that in the amount

of acquired knowledge and acuteness of reasoning many savage races

surpass the majority of the illiterate peasantry in the most civilised

countries of Europe. Mr. Wallace, in viewing the subject in one special

light, remarks: “The brain of the lowest savages, and, as far as we yet

know, of the prehistoric races, is little inferior in size to that of

the higher types of man, and is immensely superior to that of the higher

animals; while it is universally admitted that quantity of brain is one

of the most important, and probably the most essential of the elements

which determine mental power. Yet the mental requirements of savages,

and the faculties actually exercised by them, are very little above

those of animals. The higher feelings of pure morality and refined

emotion, and the power of abstract reasoning and ideal conception, are

useless to them; are rarely, if ever, manifested; and have no important

relations to their habits, wants, desires, and well-being. They possess

a mental organ beyond their needs.”[162]

Here, however, it may be well to guard against the confusion of two very

distinct elements. The higher feelings of pure morality and refined

emotion are not manifestations of intellectual vigour in the same sense

as is the power of abstract reasoning and ideal conception. It is not

rare to find an English or Scottish peasant with little intellectual

culture or capacity for abstract reasoning, but with an acutely

instinctive moral sense. On the other hand, among the criminal class, it

is by no means rare to find examples of wonderfully vigorous

intellectual power applied to the planning and accomplishing of schemes

which involve as much foresight and skill as many a triumph of

diplomacy; but which at the same time seem to be nearly incompatible

with any moral sense. Moreover, it is needless to say that intellectual

vigour and high moral principle are by no means invariable concomitants

in any class of society; nor can they be traced to a common source. Mr.

Wallace recognises that “a superior intelligence has guided the

development of man in a definite direction, and for a special purpose”;

and such guidance involves much more than the mere evolution of a higher

animal organisation. But, appreciating as he does the difficulties

involved in any acceptance of a theory of evolution which assumes man to

be the mere latest outgrowth of a development from lower forms of animal

life, Mr. Wallace points out that “natural selection could only have

endowed savage man with a brain a little superior to that of an ape,

whereas he actually possesses one very little inferior to that of a

philosopher.”

Yet neither Mr. Wallace, nor Professor Huxley when controverting this

argument, withholds a due recognition of the activity of the intellect

of the savage. No one indeed can have much intercourse with savage races

wholly dependent on their own resources without recognising that, within

a certain range, their faculties are kept in constant activity. The

savage hunter has not merely an intimate familiarity with all the

capabilities and resources of many regions traversed by him in pursuit

of his game; his geographical information includes much useful knowledge

of the topography of ranges of country which he has never visited. I

found, on one occasion, when exploring the Nepigon River, on Lake

Superior, that my Chippeway guides, though fully 500 miles from their

own country, and visiting the region for the first time, were

nevertheless on the lookout for a metamorphic rock underlying the

syenite which abounds there; and they made their way by well-recognised

land-marks to this favourite “pipestone rock.” While moreover the

Indian, like other savages, is devoid of much of what we style “useful

knowledge,” but which would be very useless to him, he is fully informed

on many subjects embraced within the range of the natural sciences; and

has a very practical knowledge of meteorology, zoology, botany, and much

else which constitutes useful knowledge to him. He is familiar with the

habits of animals, and the medicinal virtues of many plants; will find

his way through the forest by noting the special side of the trunks on

which certain lichens grow; and follow the tracks of his game, or

discover the nests of birds, by indications which would escape the most

observant naturalist. The Australian savage, stimulated apparently to an

unwonted ingenuity by the privations of an arid climate, is the inventor

of two wonderfully ingenious implements, the _wommera_ or throwing

stick, and the _bomerang_, which, when employed by the native expert,

accomplish feats entirely beyond any efforts of European skill.

Moreover, as Professor Huxley remarks, he “can make excellent baskets

and nets, and neatly fitted and beautifully balanced spears; he learns

to use these so as to be able to transfix a quartern loaf at sixty

yards; and very often, as in the case of the American Indians, the

language of a savage exhibits complexities which a well-trained European

finds it difficult to master.” Again he goes on to say: “Consider that

every time a savage tracks his game he employs a minuteness of

observation, and an accuracy of inductive and deductive reasoning which,

applied to other matters, would assure some reputation to a man of

science, and I think we need ask no further why he possesses such a fair

supply of brains. In complexity and difficulty, I should say that the

intellectual labour of a good hunter or warrior considerably exceeds

that of an ordinary Englishman.” Hence Professor Huxley is not prepared

to admit that the American or Australian savage possesses in his brain a

mental organ which he fails to turn to full account. But without

entering on the questions of evolution and natural selection in all

their comprehensive bearings, it is still apparent that the brain of the

savage is an instrument of great capacity, employed within narrow

limits.

In estimating the comparative size of the brain, it is seen to be

necessary to discriminate between individuals or races of small stature

and cases of true microcephaly. On the other hand, it is not to be

overlooked that examples of idiocy are not rare where the head is of a

fair average size, and where the mental imbecility is regarded as

congenital. But in this as in other researches of the physiologist, he

is limited in his observations mainly to the chance opportunities which

offer for study; and not unfrequently the prejudices of affection arrest

the hand of the student, and prevent a _post-mortem_ examination in

cases where science has much to hope for from freedom of investigation.

Hence the data thus far accumulated in evidence of the actual structure,

size, and weight, of the human brain fall far short of what is requisite

for a solution of many questions in reference to the relations between

cerebration and mental activity. From time to time men of science have

sought by example, as well as by precept, to lessen such impediments to

scientific research. Dr. Dalton left instructions for a _post-mortem_

examination in order to test the peculiarity of his vision, which he had

assumed to be due to a colouring of the vitreous humour; Jeremy Bentham

bequeathed his body to his friend Dr. Southwood Smith, for the purposes

of anatomical science; and the will of Harriet Martineau contained this

provision: “It is my desire, from an interest in the progress of

scientific investigation, that my skull should be given to Henry George

Atkinson, of Upper Gloucester Place, London, and also my brain, if my

death should take place within such distance of his then present abode

as to enable him to have it for purposes of scientific investigation.”

The will is dated March 10, 1864; but by a codicil, dated October 5,

1871, this direction is revoked, with the explanation which follows in

these words: “I wish to leave it on record that this alteration in my

testamentary directions is not caused by any change of opinion as to the

importance of scientific observation on such subjects, but is made in

consequence merely of a change of circumstances in my individual case.”

The natural repugnance of surviving relatives to any mutilation of the

body must always tend to throw impediments in the way of such

researches; though it may be anticipated that, with the increasing

diffusion of knowledge, such obstacles to its pursuit will be

diminished. Thus far, however, notwithstanding the persevering labours

of Welcker, Bergmann, Parchappe, Broca, Boyd, Skae, Owen, Thurnam, and

other physiologists, their observations have been necessarily limited

almost exclusively to certain exceptional sources of evidence, embracing

to a large extent only the pauper and the insane classes; and in the

case of the latter especially, the functional disorder or chronic

disease of the organ under consideration renders it peculiarly desirable

that such results should be brought, as far as possible, into comparison

with a corresponding number of observations on healthy brains of a class

fairly representing the social and intellectual status of a civilised

community.

The average brain-weight of the human adult, as determined by a numerous

series of observations, ranges for man from 40 oz. to 52½ oz., and for

woman from 35 oz. to 47½ oz. But some indications among ancient crania

tend to suggest a doubt as to whether this difference in cerebral

capacity was a uniformly marked sexual distinction among early races;

due allowance being made for difference in stature. Dr. Thurnam made the

race of the British Long Barrows a special subject of study; and Dr.

Rolleston followed up his researches with valuable results. Amongst

other points, he noted that the males appear to have averaged 5 ft. 6

in., and the females 4 ft. 10 in. in height. But while the difference of

stature between the male and the female exceeds what is observable in

most modern races, the variation in the size and internal capacity of

their skulls appears to be less than among civilised races. The like

characteristics are noticeable in the larger race of Europe’s

Palæolithic era. Nothing is more striking in the discovery of those

ancient remains of European man than the remarkable development of the

skulls and the good brain capacity of the race of the palæotechnic dawn,

where man is proved, by his works of art and all the traces of his

hearth and home, to have been still a rude hunter and cave-dweller. The

Canstadt type of skull is assumed to be that of the earliest European

race of which traces have thus far been discovered; and it is

unquestionably markedly inferior in development to that of the artistic

Troglodytes of the French Reindeer period. Yet remarkable examples of

atavism, as in the skull of St. Mansuy, the missionary bishop of Toul,

in Lorraine, in the fourth century, and in that of Robert the Bruce,

show a reversion to this early type, in accompaniment with exceptional

intellectual capacity. The Neanderthal skull, an extreme example of the

primitive type, is pronounced by Professor Schaaffhausen to be the most

brutal of all human skulls; though this impression is mainly due to the

abnormal development of the superciliary ridges, in which it undoubtedly

approximates to the chimpanzee or the gorilla. But it has an estimated

capacity of 75 cubic inches, and a corresponding cerebral development in

no degree incompatible with the idea that the remains recovered from the

Neanderthal cave may be those of a skilled hunter; and one apt in the

ingenious arts of the primitive tool-maker.

Whatever other changes, therefore, may have affected the brain as the

organ of human thought and reasoning, it does not thus far appear that

the average mass of brain has greatly increased since the advent of

European man. Important exceptions have indeed been noted. Professor

Broca’s observations on the cerebral capacity of the Parisian population

at different periods, based on nearly 400 skulls derived from vaults and

cemeteries of dates from the eleventh or twelfth to the nineteenth

century, appear to him to show a progressive cerebral development in

that centre of European civilisation.[163] But though the assumption is

not inconsistent with other results of civilisation, and is the

necessary corollary of the postulate that intellectual activity tends to

development of brain, the fact that the crania presented a still greater

diversity in type than in size reminds us of the intermixture of races

on the banks of the Seine, and the consequent necessity for much more

extended observations before so important a deduction can be received as

an established truth.

Taking the average brain-weight of the human adult as already stated,

all male brains falling much below 40 oz. or 1130 grammes, and female

brains below 35 oz. or 990 grammes, may be classed as _microcephalous_;

and all above the maxima of the medium male and female brain, viz. 52½

oz. or 1480 grammes, and 47½ oz. or 1345 grammes, may be ranked as

_megalocephalous_, or great brains.

Professor Welcker, who devoted special attention to the whole subject

under review, assumes another and simpler test when he says that skulls

of more than 540 to 550 millimetres, or 21.26 to 21.65 inches in

circumference—the weight of brain belonging to which is 1490 to 1560

grammes (52.5-55 oz. av.)—are to be regarded as exceptionally large.

But while an excess of horizontal circumference may be accepted as

indicating good cerebral capacity, it must not be overlooked that the

adoption of it as the key to any definite or even approximate

brain-weight ignores the important elements of variation involved in the

difference between acrocephalic and platycephalic head-forms. The volume

of brain in Scott, and probably in Shakespeare, appears to have depended

more on its elevation than its horizontal expansion. The same was also

the case with Byron. The intermastoid arch, measured across the vertex

of the skull from the tip of one mastoid process to the other, furnishes

an accurate gauge of this development. Of thirteen selected male English

skulls in Dr. Davis’s collection, the mean of this measurement is 15.1;

and of thirty-nine male and female English skulls, it is only 14.4. Of

the whole number of eighty-one English skulls described in the

_Thesaurus Craniorum_, three exceptionally large ones are: No. 123, that

of an ancient British chief, of fully 6 ft. 2 in. in stature, from the

Grimsthorpe Barrow, Yorkshire; No. 905, a calvarium of great magnitude,

very brachycephalic, and with the elevation across the middle of the

parietals apparently exaggerated by compression in infancy, from Hythe,

Kent; and No. 1029, another male skull, remarkable alike for its size

and weight, and with a peculiarity of conformation ascribed by Dr. Davis

to synostosis of the coronal suture. The intermastoid arch in those

exceptionally large skulls measures respectively 16.0, 16.2, and 16.9,

whereas the same measurement derived from the cast of Scott’s head taken

after death, yields the extraordinary dimensions of 19 inches. This last

measurement is over the hairy scalp. But after making ample allowance

for this, the vertical measurement of the skull and consequently of the

brain is remarkable.

Full value has been assigned at all periods to the well-developed

forehead. It is characteristic of man. The physiognomist and the

phrenologist have each given significance to it in their respective

systems; and it has received no less prominent recognition from the

poets. A fully developed forehead is assumed as distinctive of the male

skull. But Juliet, in _The Two Gentlemen of Verona_, when depreciating

her rival, exclaims, “Ay, but her forehead’s low”; and the jealous Queen

of Egypt, in _Antony and Cleopatra_, is told of Octavia that “her

forehead is as low as she would wish it.” “The fair large front” of

Milton’s perfect man is the external index of an ample cerebrum: the

organ to which the seat of consciousness, intelligence, and will is

assigned. It is therefore consistent with this that a low, retreating

forehead is popularly assumed to be the characteristic index of the

savage, and of the unintellectual among civilised races. But the

cerebral characteristics of both ancient and modern civilised races have

still to be studied in detail; and the influence of race and sex on the

form of the head and the mass and weight of the brain, involves some

curious questions in relation to the oldest illustrations of the

physical characteristics of man, and to the effect of civilisation on

the relative development of the sexes.

Early observations led Dr. Pruner-Bey and other ethnologists of France

to recognise in certain ancient Gaulish skulls of a brachycephalic type

the evidences of a primitive race, assumed to represent the inhabitants

of France and of Central Europe during its Reindeer period, and which

appeared to be assigned with reasonable probability to a Mongol origin.

But in the Cro-Magnon cavern, and in other caves more recently explored,

the remains of a race of men have been brought to light markedly

dolichocephalic, and no less striking in cranial capacity. Dr. Broca

speaks of these ancient cave-dwellers of the valley of the Vézère as

characterised by “sure signs of a powerful cerebral organisation. The

skulls are large. Their diameters, their curves, their capacity, attain,

and even surpass, our medium skulls of the present day. The forehead is

wide, by no means receding, but describing a fine curve. The amplitude

of the frontal tuberosities denotes a large development of the anterior

cerebral lobes, which are the seat of the most noble intellectual

faculties.”

This primitive race of hunters, marked by such exceptional

characteristics, belonged to the remote Reindeer period of Western

Europe, and was contemporary with the mammoth, the tichorine rhinoceros,

and the fossil horse, as well as with the cave-lion, the cave-bear, and

other long-extinct carnivora of Europe. The remarkable evidence of their

intellectual capacity has already been reviewed, in considering the

manifestations of the artistic faculty among primitive races. Their

weapons and implements, including carved maces or official batons, as

they are assumed to be, contribute additional evidence of skill and

latent capacity among a primitive race of hunters and cave-dwellers. Dr.

Broca, after a consideration of the merits of their ingenious arts,

says: “They had advanced to the very threshold of civilisation”; and Dr.

Pruner-Bey thus comments on their characteristics: “If we consider that

its three individuals had a cranial capacity much superior to the

average at the present day; that one of them was a female, and that

female crania are generally below the average of _male_ crania in size;

and that nevertheless the cranial capacity of the Cro-Magnon woman

surpasses the average capacity of male skulls of to-day, we are led to

regard the great size of the brain as one of the more remarkable

characters of the Cro-Magnon race. This cerebral volume seems to me even

to exceed that with which at the present day a stature equal to that of

our cave-folks would be associated; whilst the skulls from the Belgium

caves are small, not only absolutely, but even relatively in the rather

small stature of the inhabitants of those caves.”

The Canstadt head is undoubtedly an unintellectual type suggestive of an

inferior, though not necessarily an older savage race; for the evidence

of climate, contemporary fauna, and other indices of the environments of

the Cro-Magnon cave-dwellers, all point to an early Post-Glacial era.

Dr. Isaac Taylor, in his _Origin of the Aryans_, assuming the priority

of the Canstadt man, speaks of him as “this primitive savage, the

earliest inhabitant of Europe.” The forehead in this type is low and

receding, and the cerebral capacity generally correspondingly inferior.

The relative superposition in some discoveries of ancient human remains,

as in the alluvium and gravels of a former bed of the Seine, at

Grenelle, lends confirmation to the idea that in this poorly-developed

cranial type we recover the physical characteristics of the earliest

type of the European savage thus far brought to light. But no disclosure

of regular sepulture, or of implements or carvings assignable to him,

have hitherto furnished the means of determining his condition or mode

of life.

The disclosures of the rock-shelters in the valley of the Vézère are, on

the contrary, replete with interest, from the evidence they furnish of a

race of savage hunters, in whom ingenious skill and great artistic

aptitude gave evidence of latent intellectual capacity of a high order.

The remarkable size of crania accompanying those examples of primitive

art seemingly pertaining to the Troglodytes of the Mammoth and Reindeer

periods of Central Europe, is the more significant from its bearing on

the evidence of progressive cerebral development adduced by Dr. Broca

from skulls recovered from ancient and modern cemeteries of Paris. It

appears, indeed, to conflict with any theory of a progressive

development from the Troglodyte of the Post-Glacial age to the civilised

Frenchman of modern times. Professor Boyd Dawkins has accordingly been

at some pains in his _Cave Hunting_ to show that the conclusions formed

by previous observers as to the epoch of their burial are not supported

by the facts of the case; and he sums up his review of the whole

evidence by expressing a conviction that he “should feel inclined to

assign the interments to the Neolithic age, in which cave-burial was so

common. The facts,” he adds, “do not warrant the human skeletons being

taken as proving the physique of the palæolithic hunters of the

Dordogne, or as a basis for an inquiry into the ethnology of the

palæolithic races. Professor Boyd Dawkins also pronounces the same

doubts in reference to the equally characteristic male skeleton found in

a cave at Mentone, and to others obtained in the Lombrive and other

caves. It is not to be overlooked that the possibility of the intrusion

of human remains into earlier strata constitutes an important element

suggesting caution in reasoning from such evidence. For the remains of

man differ from those of other animals found in such series of deposits

as mark a succession of periods, in so far as they pertain to the only

animal habitually given to the practice of interment. Human skeletons

found under such circumstances may have been artificially intruded long

subsequent to the accumulation of the breccia in which they lay.

Happily, however, any doubts as to the contemporaneity of the human

remains with the other cave relics has been removed by the discovery of

skeletons, similar in type, in other caverns in the same valley—and

especially in that of Laugerie Basse,—in positions which seem to leave

no room for questioning their being of the same age as the works of art

found along with them.

Other examples of the ancient man of Europe show him in like manner

endowed with a cerebral development in advance of the rudest races of

modern times. The skull found by Dr. Schmerling in the Engis cave, near

Liège, along with remains of six or seven human skeletons, was embedded

in the same matrix with bones of the fossil elephant, rhinoceros, hyæna,

and other extinct quadrupeds. It is a fairly proportioned,

well-developed dolichocephalic skull; and, like others of the ancient

human skulls of different types thus far found, has signally

disappointed the expectations of those who count upon invariably finding

a lower type the older the formation in which it occurs. “Assuredly,”

says Professor Huxley, “there is no mark of degradation about any part

of its structure. It is, in fact, a fair average human skull, which

might have belonged to a philosopher, or might have contained the

thoughtless brain of a savage.” Even the famous Neanderthal skull, of

uncertain geological antiquity, but pronounced to be “the most brutal of

all human skulls,” acquires its exceptional character, as already noted,

chiefly from the abnormal development of the superciliary region.

* * * * *

It is a universally accepted fact that the size of the male head and the

weight of the brain are greater than those of the female. The average

weight of the male brain is found to exceed that of the female by about

10 per cent; or, as it is stated by Professor Welcker, the brain-weight

of man is to that of woman as 100 to 90. But the difference of stature

between the two sexes has to be taken into account. The average, based

on various series of observations to determine the mean stature for man

and for woman, shows the latter to be about 8 per cent less than the

former; or, as Dr. Thurnam has stated it more precisely:

RATIO OF STATURE AND BRAIN-WEIGHT IN THE TWO SEXES

MALE. FEMALE.

Stature 100 92.0

Weight of brain 100 90.3

The lost Atlantis, and other ethnographic studies · 第 34 / 39 段