Page:American Anthropologist NS vol. 22.djvu/87

Two points made by Dr. Aronovici are of particular interest to anthropologists: the assertion that in racial assimilation the higher classes of the respective races intermarry more readily than do the lower—owing, we may surmise, to the sharing of a common culture and a common language by the higher classes, whereas the lower have no such common basis of understanding. The other point is the assertion that racial differentiation in a given national group means mental stimulus.

As to the latter it seems to me that the author has not established his point. He gives as instances the racial differentiation of the British Isles, particularly that of England. But is this true of the majority of the great civilizations—of the Egyptians, the Hebrews, the Greeks, and the Romans? He himself refers to the cultural enrichment which those civilizations received from outside sources; but this can scarcely be taken as supporting his argument. Nor, for that matter, have we ever had in history such extremes of racial differences as have been thrown haphazard into the American melting pot.

After all, is it not a question of cultural diffusion? This is sometimes more easily effected from a distance than when the people are living side by side. The author makes the point, however, that when living side by side they have all the better opportunities for a culture borrowing and mutual enrichment. Therein lies the great opportunity of American civilization if it but recognize these opportunities and cultivate a receptive attitude that will utilize them. Some of this utilization of aboriginal culture we are now witnessing.

This is the third in the series of Handbooks projected by the Bureau of American Ethnology. In order of their appearance, these are: Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico (Bulletin 30); Handbook of American Indian Languages (Bulletin 40), Part I of which has been published; and the work represented by the present volume. No living author is better informed on the subject of aboriginal American antiquities than William H. Holmes, who has the added advantage of being at once master of the philosophic and the systematic method of presentation.

In dealing with archaeology, the sources of information are com-