02 - English Men of Science- Their Nature and Nurture by Sir Francis Galton

Dive into the findings of Galtons intriguing survey that sought to uncover the distinctions and similarities among the eminent men of his era. This podcast features a wealth of biographical details, biometric data, and thought-provoking quotations from these distinguished individuals. Summarized by Niobium.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Chapter one, Part one of English Men of Science by
Francis Galton. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings
are in the public domain. For more informational to volunteer,
please visit LibriVox dot org. Read by Leon Harvey. Englishmen
of Science Chapter one antecedence object of book, Definition of

(00:23):
man of science. Data, nature and nurture, race and birthplace,
occupation of parents and position in life, physical peculiarities of parents,
premont genito fertility, heredity, pedigrees, statistical results. The intent of
this book is to supply what may be termed a

(00:44):
natural history of the Englishmen of Science of the present day.
It will describe their earliest anticidence, including the hereditary influences,
the inborn qualities of their mind and body, the causes
that first induced them to pursue science, the education they received,
and their opinions on its marrit The advantages are great
of confining the investigation to men of our own period

(01:06):
and nation. Our knowledge of them is more complete, and
where deficient, it may be supplemented by further inquiry. They
are subject to a moderate range of these influences, which
have the largest disturbing power and are therefore well fitted
for statistical investigation. Lastly, the results we may obtain are
of direct practical interest. The inquiries are complicated, one at

(01:28):
the best is advantageous not to complicate it further by
dealing with notabilities whose histories are seldom autobiographical, never complete,
and not always very accurate, and who lived under the
varied and imperfectly appreciated conditions of European life in several
countries and numerous periods, during many different centuries. Definition of

(01:50):
man of science, I do not attempt to define a
scientific man, because no frontier line or definition exists which
separate any group of individuals from the rest of the species.
Natural groups have nuclear by no outlines. They blend on
every side with other systems whose nuclei have alien characters.

(02:13):
A naturalist must construct his picture of nature on the
same principle that an engraver in Mezotine proceeds on his plate,
beginning with their principal lights as so many different points
of departure, and working outwards from each of them until
the intervening spaces are covered. Some definition of an ideal
scientific man might possibly be given and accepted, But who

(02:35):
is to decide in each case where the particular individuals
fall within the definition. It seems to me the best
way to take the verdict of the scientific world as
expressed in definite language. It may be over lenient in
some cases, in others it may never have been uttered,
but on the whole it appears more satisfactory than any
other verdict which exists or is attainable to have been

(02:58):
elected a Fellow of the Royals Aside, since the reform
in the mode of election introduced by mister Justice Grove
nearly thirty years ago, as a real essay of scientific merit.
Owing to various reasons, many excellent men of science of
mature ages may not be Fellows, but those who bear
the title cannot be considered in some degree as entitled

(03:20):
to the epithet of scientific I therefore look upon this
fellowship as a past examination, so to speak, and from
among the fellows of the Royal Society aslect those who
have yet further qualifications. One of these is a fact
of having earned a medal for scientific work, another of
having presided over a learned society or a section of

(03:40):
the British Association. Another of having been elected on the
Council of the royal society, another of being professor at
some important college or university. These, and a few other
similar signs of being appreciated by contemporary men of science
are the qualifications for which I have looked in selecting
my list of typical scientific men. I have only deviated

(04:01):
from the technical rules in two or three cases where
there appeared good reason for their relaxation, and where the
returns appeared likely to be of peculiar interest. On these principles,
I drew up a list of one hundred and eighty men.
Most of them were qualified on more than one count,
and many on several counts. Also, the list appeared nearly
exhaustive in respect to those men of mature age who

(04:22):
live in or near London. Since other private tests suggested
few editions. As two of these tests have been proposed
by several correspondents, it may be well to describe them.
The one is the election of individuals, on account of
their scientific eminence, to a certain well known literary and
scientific club, the name of which it is unnecessary to mention.

(04:44):
The committee of this club have the power of electing, annually,
out of their regular turn knowing persons eminent for science, literature, art,
or public services. The two or three men who have
in each year received this covided privilege on the grounds
of science now amounted to a considerable number, and they
are all on my list. Again. There are certain dining
clubs in connection with the Royal Society, though one meeting

(05:07):
on the afternoon of every evening that it meets, and
the other more rarely, And there are about fifty members
to which of these clubs, the same persons being in
many instances members of both. The election to either of
the clubs is a testimony of some value to the
estimation of the scientific status of a man by his contemporaries.
Almost all their members are on my list. No doubt.

(05:28):
Many persons of considerable position, living in Edinburgh, Dublin and
elsewhere at a distance from London, are not among those
with whose experiences I am about to deal. But that
is no objection. I do not profess or care to
be exhaustive in my data. Only desired to have a
sufficiency of material, and to be satisfied that it is
good so far as it goes, and a perfectly fair sample.

(05:51):
I do not particularly want a list that shall include
every man of science in England, but seek for one
that is sufficiently extended for my purposes, and that contains
none but truly scientific men in the usual acceptation of
that word. However, I have made some further estimates, and
conclude that an exhaustive list of men of the British

(06:11):
Isles are the same mature, ages and general scientific status
of those of whom I have been speaking, would amutter
three hundred, but not to more. Some of my readers
may feel surprised that so many as three hundred persons
are to be found in the United Kingdom who deserve
the title of scientific men. Probably they have been accustomed

(06:31):
to concentrate their attention upon few notabilities, and to ignore
their colleagues. It must, however, be recollected, that all biographies,
even of the greatest men, reveal numerous associates and competitors
whose merit influence were far greater than had been suspected
by the outside world. Great discoveries have often been made
simultaneously by workers ignorant of each other's labors. This shows

(06:55):
that they had derived their inspiration from a common but
hidden source, as no mere chance would account for simultaneous discovery.
In illustration of this view, it will suffice to mention
a few of the great discoveries in this generation that
a photography is most intimately associated the name of Neippe,
Dogueer and Talbot, who were successful in eighteen thirty nine

(07:15):
along different lines of research. But Thomas Wedgewood was a
photographer in eighteen o two. Though he could not fix
his pictures as to the origin of species, Wallace is
well known to have added independent share in its discovery
side by side with the far more comprehensive investigations of
Darwin in spectrum analysis. The remarks of Stokes were interior

(07:36):
to and independent of the works of Kertschhoff and Bunsen.
Electric telegraphy has numerous parents, German, English and American. The
idea of conservation of energy has unnumbered roots. The simultaneous
discovery of the planet Neptune on theoretical grounds by Leverio
and Adams is a very curious instance of what we

(07:58):
are considering in patent inventions. The fact of Simultan's discovery
is notoriously frequent. It would therefore appear that few discoveries
are wholly due to a single man, but rather that
vague and imperfect ideas which float in conversation and literature
must grow, gather, and develop until some more presspicatious and

(08:20):
prompt mind than the rest clearly sees them. Thus Laplace
is understood to have seized on cant nebula hypothesis and
bend them on Priestly's phrase, the greatest happiness of the
greatest number, and each of them elaborate the idea he
had so seized into a system. The first discoverers beat
their contemporaries in point of time, and by doing so

(08:42):
they become leaders of thought. They direct the intellectual energy
of the day into the channels they opened. It would
have run in other channels but for their labor. Is
therefore due to them, not that science progresses, but that
a progress is as rapid as it is, and in
the direction towards which they themselves have striven. We must
neither underrate nor overrate their achievements. I would compare the

(09:05):
small band of men who would achieve a conspicuous scientific
position to islands which are not the detached objects they
appear to the vulgar eye, but only the uppermost portions
of hills whose bulk is unseen. To pursue this metaphor,
the range of my inquiry dips a few fathomable level
at which popular reputation begins. It is of interest to

(09:27):
know the ratio which the numbers of the leading scientific
men bear to the population of English. Generally. I obtain
it in this way. Although one hundred and eighty persons
only one on my list, I reckon as already mentioned,
that it would have been possible to have included three
hundred the same ages without descending in the scale of
scientific position. Also, it appears that the ages of half
of the number of my lists lie between fifty and

(09:49):
sixty five, and that about three quarters of these may
be considered for census comparisons as English. I combine these
numbers and compare them with that of the male population
of England whales between the same limits of age, and
find the required ratio to be about one in ten thousand.
What then, are the conditions of nature and the various
circumstances and conditions of life which I include under the

(10:12):
general name of nurture, which have selected the one and
left the remainder. The object of this book is to
answer this question. Data. My data are the autobiographical replies
to a very long series of printed questions addressed severally
to the one hundred and eighty men whose names were
in the list I have described, and they fill two

(10:34):
large portfolios. I cannot sufficiently thank my correspondence for the
court uses with which they applied to my very troublesome queries,
the great pains they have taken to be precise and
truthful in their statements, and the compness reposed in my discretion.
Those of the answers which are selected for statistical treatments
somewhat exceed one hundred in number. In addition to these,

(10:57):
I have utilized several others which were too complete fostgal purposes,
or which arrived late. But these also have been of
real service to me, sometimes in corroborating at others in
questioning previous provisional conclusions. I wish emphatically to add that
the foremost members of the scientific world have contributed in
full proportion to their numbers. It must not for a

(11:18):
moment be supposed that mediocrity is unduly represented to my data.
Natural history is an impersonal result. I am therefore able
to treat my subject anonymously. With the exception of one
chapter in which the pedigrees of certain families are given.
Nature and nurture. The phrase nature and nurture is a
convenient jingle of words, for it separates under two distinct heads,

(11:41):
the innumerable elements of which personality is composed. Nature is
all that a man brings with himself into the world.
Nurture is every influence from without that affects him after
his birth. The distinction is clear that one produces the
infant such as actually is, including its latent faculties of
growth of body and mind. The other affords the environment

(12:02):
amid which the growth takes place, by which natural tendencies
may be strengthened or thwarted, or wholly new ones implanted.
Neither of the terms implies any theory. Natural gifts may
or may not be hereditary. Nurture does not especially consist
of food, clothing, education, or tradition, but it includes all
these and similar influences, whether known or unknown. When nature

(12:25):
and nurture compete for supremacy on equal terms in the
sense to be explained, the former proves the stronger, is
needless to insist that neither is self sufficient. The highest
natural endowments may be staffed by defective nurture, while no
carefulness of nurture can overcome the evil tendencies of an
interestically bad physique, weak brain, or brutal disposition. Differences of

(12:48):
nurture stamp unmistakable marks on the disposition of the soldier, clergyman,
or scholar, but are wholly insufficient to effaced the deeper
marks of individual character. The impress of class distinctions is superficial,
and may be compared to those which give a general
resemblance to a family of daughters at a provincial ball,

(13:09):
all dressed alike and so similar a voice an address
as to puzzle a recently introduced partner in his endeavors
to recollect with which of them he is engaged to dance.
But an intimate friend forgets their general resemblance in the
presence of the far greater dissimilarity which he has learned
to appreciate. There are twins of the same sex, so

(13:29):
alike in body of mind that not even their own
mothers can distinguish them. Their features, voice, and expressions are similar.
They see things in the same light, and their ideas
follow the same laws of association. This close resemblance necessarily
gives way under the gradually accumulated influences of difference of nurture,

(13:50):
but often last till manhood. I have been told of
a case which two twin brothers, both married, that one,
a medical man, and the yellow clerguyman, were staying at
the same house. One mourning for a joke, they changed
their neckties, and each impersonated the other, sitting by his
wife through the whole of the breakfast without discovery. Shakespeare

(14:10):
was a close observer of nature. It is therefore worth
recollecting that he recognizes in his thirty six plays three
pairs of family likeness so deceptive as to create absurd confusion.
Two of these pairs are in the Comedy of Errors,
and the other in Twelfth Night fall in one. I
heard of a case not many years back, in which
a young Englishman had traveled to Saint Petersburg, then much

(14:33):
less successible than now, with no letters of introduction, and
who lost his pocket book and was penniless. He was
walking along the quay in some despair at his prospects,
when he was startled by the cheery voice of a stranger,
who accounsted him, saying he required no introduction because his
family likeness proclaimed him to be the son of an
old friend. The englishman did not conceal his difficulties, and

(14:55):
the stranger actually lent him the sum he needed on
the guarantee of his family. Likeness confirmed no doubt by
some conversation. In this and similar instances, how smallest been
influence of nurture, the child had developed into manhood along
a predestined course laid out in his nature. It would
be impossible to find a converse instance in which two

(15:15):
persons unlike at that birth had been molded by similarity
of nurture into so close a resemblance that their nearest
relations failed to distinguish them. Let us quote Shakespeare again
as an illustration in A Midsummer Night's Dream three two
Helena and Hermia, who had been several in childhood and girlhood,

(15:36):
and had identical nurture. So we grew together like two
were double cherries, seeming parted, but yet a union. In petition,
we're fiscally quite unlike. The one was short to dark,
the other tall and fair. Therefore, the similarity of their
nurture did not affect their features. The moral likeness was

(15:56):
superficial because of a sore. A trial of temper, which
produced a violent quarrel between them, brought out great dissimilarity
of character in the competition between nature and nurture, when
their differences in need the case do not exceed those
which distinguish individuals of the same race living in the
same country under no very exceptional conditions, Nature certainly proves
the stronger of the two race and birthplace. As regards

(16:21):
the race of the scientific men on my list, it
has already been mentioned that, for the purpose of a
census enumeration, three fourths may be considered English, but their
precise origin is as follows, omitting a few Germans. Out
of every ten scientific men, five are pure English, one
is Anglo Welsh, one is Anglo Irish, one is Purest Scotch,

(16:42):
one includes Anglo Scotch, Scotch, Irish, Pure Irish, Welsh, manx
and Channel Islands. Finally, one is unclassed. These unclassed are
of extremely mixed origin. One is in about equal degrees English, Irish,
French and German, another as English, Scotch, Creole and Dutch.

(17:02):
Another English, Dutch, Creole and Swedish, and so on. I
trust to read who knows what creoles are, Namely the
descendants of white families long settled in a tropical colony,
and that it does not confound the term with mulletoes.
I give this information without being able to make much
present use of it. Is chiefly intended to serve as

(17:23):
a standard with which other natural groups may hereafter be compared,
such as groups of artists or of literary men. One
would desire to know whether persons in England generally show
so great a diversity of origin, but it is somewhat
difficult to answer the question, owing to a want of
precision in the word generally. If we were to go

(17:44):
to rural districts or small stagnant towns, we should find
much less variety of origin. But I think there would
be quite as much in the more energetic classes of
the metropolis, who have emigrated from all quarters. Some haphazard
selecting which I tried to con affirmed this view. Then
comes the important question is this a sign that a

(18:04):
mixture of one or more of the various civilized races
is more conductive to form a nable offspring. No doubt
the varied nurture due to separate streams of tradition has
great influence in awakening original thought, But we are not
speaking of this now. The question is about nature. On
analysis of the scientific status of the men of my list,
it appeared to me that their ability is high in

(18:27):
proportion to their numbers. Among those of pure race, the
border Men and Lowland Scotch come out exceedingly well the
Anglo Irish and Anglo Welsh, notwithstanding eminent individual exceptions, what
does the whole rank last? Owing to my list not
being exhausted, I hardly like to attempt conclusions as to

(18:47):
the precise production of scientific ability of the Scotch, English
and Irish severally, but there cannot be a shadow of
doubt that its degrees are in the order I have named.
The birthplace of scientific men and of their parents are
usually in towns away from the sea coast. Out of
every five birthplaces I found that one lies in London

(19:09):
or its suburbs, one in an important town such as Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dublin, Birmingham,
Liverpool or Manchester, one is in a small town, and
two either in a village or actually in the country.
These returns are given with more detail in the footnote.
The branch of science pursued is often an encuraged to
disaccord with the surrounding influence of the birthplace. Mechanicians are

(19:34):
usually hardy lads born in the country. Biologists are frequently
pure townsfolk, partially in consequence of the prevalence of their
urban distribution. I find that an irregular plot may be
marked on the map of England which includes much less
than one half of its area, but more than ninety
two percent at the birthplaces of the English scientific men
or of their parents. The accompanying diagram shows its position.

(19:57):
One thin arm abuts on the sea between Hayes Distings
and Folkestone, and runs northwards over London and Birmingham, where
it is joined by another thin arm, preceding from Cornwall
and Devonshire, crossing the Bristol Channel to Swansea and thence
to Worcester. The two arms are now combined into one
of double breadth. It covers Nottingham, Shrewsbury, Liverpool and Manchester.

(20:22):
Above these latitudes it again narrows, and, after sending a
small branch to Hull, proceeds northwards to Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Thus there are large areas in England and Wales outside
this irregular plot which are very deficient in aboriginal science.
One comprises the whole of the Eastern counties. Another includes
the huge triangle at whose angles Hastings, Worcester and Exeter,

(20:46):
or rather Exmouth are situated. Occupation of parents and position
in life. Mindless contains men who have been born in
every social grade, from the highest order in the peerage
down to the factory hand in Sinnam peasant. But the
returns which I shall discuss do not range quite so widely.
These are ninety six in number, and may be classified

(21:08):
as follows. But the same name appears in two classes
on eleven occasions, so that the total entries are raised
to one hundred seven noblemen and private gentlemen, nine army
and Navy, six civil service nine subordinate officers three total,
eighteen law eleven medical, nine clergy ministers, six teachers, six

(21:31):
architect one secretary to an insurance office one total thirty
four bankers, seven merchants, twenty one manufacturers fifteen total, forty
three farmers two others one total of one hundred seven.
The terms used in the third and fourth groups must

(21:52):
be understood in a very general sense. Thus there are
some merchants on a very small scale, indeed, and others
on a very large one. It is by no means
a case that those who have raised themselves by their
abilities are found to be abler than their are contemporaries
who began their careers with advantages of fortune and social position.

(22:13):
They are not more distinguished as original investigators. Neither are
they more discerning in those numerous questions not strictly scientific,
which happen to be brought before the councils of scientific societies.
There can be no doubt but that the upper classes
of a nation like our own, which are largely and
continually recruited by selections from below, are by far the

(22:35):
most productive of natural ability. The lower classes are. In truth.
The residuum of the six clergymen or ministers who were
fathers of scientific men, no less than four appear in
a second category, viz. One clergymen and schoolmaster, two physician
afterwards clergymen, three Unitarian minister and schoolmaster, four professor of

(23:00):
classics afterwards an independent minister. Among the successful graduates of
Oxford and Cambridge, and among purely literary men, we find
a much lighter proportion of sons of clergymen. There is
a Cambridge a well known university scholarship called the Bell,
which is open only to sons of clergymen of the
Church of England, as it has been chiefly given for

(23:21):
a classical proficiency, we may be almost sure that the
senior classic of his year, if he were the son
of a clergyman, would also be a Bell scholar. I
looked through the lists and found that out of forty
five senior classics eighteen twenty four sixty eight inclusive, ten
had gained the scholarship. Whence I conclude that at least

(23:42):
one out of every four or five Cambridge graduates is
the son of a clergyman. At this rate, out of
one hundred Cambridge graduates, twenty two would have had clergymen
of the Church of England for their fathers, whereas out
of one hundred scientific men only three or four were
so circumstanced. It is therefore a fact that, in proportion

(24:03):
to the pains bestowed on their education, generally, the sons
of clergymen rarely take a lead in science. The pursuit
of science is uncongenial to the priestly character. It has
fallen to my lot to serve for many years on
the councils of many scientific societies, and accepting a very
few astronomers and mathematicians, about whom I will speak directly.

(24:25):
I can only recall three colleagues who were clergymen. Curiously enough,
two of these, the Revs. Baden Powell and Dunbar Heath,
have been prosecuted for unorthodoxy. The third worst, Bishop Wilberforce,
who can highly be said to have loved science. He
rarely attended the meetings, but delighted in administration and sought

(24:46):
openings for indirect influence. The reason for the abstinence of
clergymen from scientific work cannot be that they are too busy,
too much home tied, or cramped in pecuniary means, because
other professional men, more busy, more at the care of others,
and having less assured revenues, are abundly presented on all

(25:07):
the council lists. Not carring to trust my unaided recollections,
I have examined the council lists of ten scientific societies
at on air the three periods eighteen fifty, eighteen sixty,
eighteen seventy. There have been changes in some other societies,
and there are many trifling peculiarities of detail, tedious and
unnecessary here to deal with. But the following statement is

(25:30):
substantially correct. The ordinary members of Council are our rough
general average twenty in number, to which of the following
societies one Royal, two British Association, three Astronomical, four Chemical,
five Geological, six, Linnean seven, Zoological, eight, Geographical, nine and

(25:51):
ten the two predecessors of the recently established Anthropological Institute viz.
Ethnological and Anthropological eleven statistical. Therefore, as we are dealing
with three distinct periods, eleven societies and twenty members of
Council to each, there have been about three multiplied by

(26:11):
eleven modiplied by twenty equals six hundred and sixty separate appointments.
Clergymen have held only sixteen of these, or one in forty,
and they have, in nearly every case been attached to
those subdivisions of science which have few assalient points to
scratch or jar against dogma. Thus, Professor Chalice, Doctor Lloyd,
Doctor Bobinson, doctor Whewell, Reverend J. Fischer, Reverend W. Webb,

(26:37):
Reverend Vernon Harcourt, Professor Pritchard, Professor Price, Reverend J. Barlow,
and Professor Willis are all chiefly connected with astronomy, physics,
and mathematics, The five remaining names are those of the
Reverend G. C Renownd, the geographical Bishop Wilforce, and the
Reverend Dunbar Heath, of whom I have already spoken, the

(27:01):
Reverend Doctor Nicholson, and the Reverend Canon Greenwell. There is
not a single biologist among them. Physical Peculiarities of parents.
It has been frequently asserted that certain physical peculiarities in
the parents clash, and that others combined happily in the offspring.
I therefore thought it well to make inquiries as to

(27:23):
the figure of complexion, color of hair, height, and other
physical peculiarities of the fathers and mothers of the scientific men.
I also asked about the temperaments, if they were marked,
but the answers to these were few. Tables show in
the number of cases in which there has been harmony,
indifference or contrast between various physical peculiarities of the two parents.

(27:46):
Our tables displayed on the page the temperament of parents
summary harmony ten cases contrast two in different ten total
twenty two. I displayed on page colour of hair of
parents summary harmony forty four cases contrast six in different

(28:07):
twenty two total semi two. I have an addition, eleven
cases of colored hair yellowish, sandy, red, light, auban, dark,
urban chestnut, but not one case of strict harmony. Among
them are tables displayed on the page figure of parents
of scientific men summary harmony twenty four cases, contrast, twenty

(28:29):
three in different twenty four total seventy one. The foregoing
tables show results bearing on the question whether harmony or
contrast prevails in the physical characteristics of the parents. I
think they must be accepted as decidedly in favor of harmony.
The grand totals which they give are seventy eight cases

(28:51):
of harmony, thirty one of contrast, and fifty six of indifference.
In short, there is more purity of breed in scientific
men than whatever salted from Haphacard marriages. In the temperaments
of their parents, harmony strongly prevails over contrast, the proportion
being five to one in favor of the former color
of hair. Harmony is twice as frequent as contrast. In

(29:14):
figure is equally common because corpulent, stout, or plump persons
of one sex seem to have a peculiar and reciprocated
liking for spare need with small persons of the other.
This is literally the only case in these tables where
a love of contrast equals that of harmony. I came
too much the same conclusions by giving appropriate marks for harmony, contrast,

(29:36):
and indifference to each quality in each case, thus obtaining
aggregate marks for every pair, which I treated on much
the same principle that their separate qualities are treated in
the table. As regards height, there is a stricter method
of investigation which statisticans will appreciate. It is well known
by repeated experience that the heights of men and of

(29:57):
women in any large group are distributed according to the
law of frequency of error. In other words, the proportionate
numbers of people of different heights corresponds to what would
have been the case supposing statute to be due to
the aggregate action of many small, independent variable causes. The
probability is inconceivably small that all the independent causes should,

(30:19):
in any given case co operate to produce an excessifyt
If they did so, the result will be a broad
Dick Naggian giant. Or whether they should or cooperate to
produce a deficiency in height, in which case result would
be a Lilliputian dwarf. On the other hand, the probability
is great that the number and effects of the causes
in excess and those in deficiency of their several average

(30:41):
values will be pretty equal. As for these and all
other intermediate cases, their relative frequency is determined by the
above law, which is based on that by which the
relative frequency of different runs of luck is calculated. I
now proceed to apply this law. I have sixty two
cases in which the heights of both parents are given numerically. Once.

(31:04):
It appears that one the average height of the fathers
is between five foot and nine inches and five foot
nine out a quarter inches, and that that distribution conforms
closer to the law of frequency of error, the probable
error of the series being one point seven inches. Two,
the average height of the mothers is five foot four
and a half inches, and the distribution of their heights

(31:25):
conforms fairly to the above mentioned law, the probable era
of the series being one point nine inches. It follows
from the well known properties of the law in question
that if there had been no sexual selection in respective height,
the sum of the heights of the two parents would
also conform to the law of frequency of error. It
appears from the facts in this chapter that the marriages

(31:46):
of parents of the scientific men on my list actually
tended to produce differentiation and purity of race. My data
concerning the parents of men of other groups are insufficient
to enable me yet to give comparative results showing how
far the selective sexual interest so the population generally would thwart,
be indifferent to or cooperate with, the influences of future
social restrictions on unsuitable marriages or encouragement of suitable ones primogenito,

(32:14):
et cetera. The following statements shows in percentages the position
of the scientific men in respect to age among their
brothers and sisters only sons twenty two cases, eldest sons
twenty six cases, youngest sons fifteen cases. Of those who
are neither eldest nor youngest, thirteen come in the elder

(32:35):
half of the family twelve and the younger half and
eleven are exactly in the middle total ninety nine. It
further appears that at the time of the birth of
the scientific men, the ages of their father's average thirty
six years and those of their mothers thirty. The details
are shown in the table below. Tables displayed on the

(32:55):
page age of parents of birth as scientific men two
columns going across a number of cases, and the fathers
and mothers under twenty father's zero, mothers two twenty onwards,
father's one, mother's twenty twenty five onwards, father's fifteen, mothers

(33:18):
twenty six thirty onwards, father's thirty four mothers thirty four
thirty five onwards, father's twenty two mothers twelve forty onwards,
father's seventeen mothers five forty five onwards father's seven mothers
one fifty and above father's four mothers no data one

(33:42):
hundred total cases. Putting these facts together is one that
elder sons appear nearly twice as often as younger sons.
Two that as regards intermediate children, the elder and younger
half of the family contribute equally, and three that only
sons are as common as elder sons. We must conclude

(34:03):
that the age of the parents, within the limits with
which we chiefly have to deal, has little influence on
the nature of the child. Secondly, that the elder sons
have on the whole decided advantages of the nurture of
the younger sons. They are more lucky to become possessed
of independent means and therefore able to follow the pursuits
that have most attraction to their tastes. They are treated

(34:25):
more as companions by their parents and have earlier responsibility,
both of which would develop independence of character. Probably also,
the first born child of families in the world would
generally have more attention in his infancy, more breathing space,
and better nourishment than his younger brothers and sisters in
their several turns. The opposing disadvantage of primogeniture in producing

(34:49):
less healthy children and half as many idiots, again as
the average of the rest of the family, has not
been sensibly felt, partly because the latter risk is very small,
and partly because the mothers of the Scientific Men are
somewhat less youthful than those from whom the above statistical
results were calculated. See Duncan on Fertility et cetera, second edition,

(35:10):
page two hundred ninety three four for tabulations of doctor A.
Mitchell's results. An unusual number of the mothers of the
Scientific Men were between thirty and thirty four at the
time of their birth. This is a very suitable age,
according to the views of Aristotle, but undoubtedly older than
what doctor Duncas statistics page three hundred eighty seven three

(35:32):
hundred ninety recommend. According to these the most favorable period
for the survival of mother and child, and therefore probably
the best in every sense, is when she is twenty
to twenty five at the time of giving birth. The
important question of the effect of the age of the
parent on the well being of the offspring seems never

(35:52):
yet to have been treated as strictly and as copiously
as it deserves. Doctor Duncan, in the chapter of his
work above referred to, has discussed the materials at his
disposal with great ingenuity and industry, but adequate statistics sought.
According to the various classes of society are still wanting fertility.

(36:13):
The families are usually large, to which scientific men belong.
I have two sets of returns, the one of brothers
and sisters, excluding for the most part those who died
in infancy, and the other of brothers and sisters who
were attained thirty years. In these several cases I have
included the scientific man himself, and find, on an average
of about one hundred cases that the total number of

(36:35):
brothers and sisters is six point three in the first case,
and four point eight in the second. It is a
matter of great interest to compare with these figures the
number of the children of the scientific men themselves. It
is easy to do so with fairness, because the time
of marriage proves to be nearly the same in both cases.
If anything, the scientific men marry earlier than their parents.

(37:00):
But it remains to eliminate all cases of absolutely sterile
marriages on the part of the scientific men, and those
in which there might yet be other children born. Having
attended to these precautions, I find the number of their
living children, say Evightes between five and thirty, to be
four point seven. This implies a diminution of fertility as
compared with that of their own parents, and it confirms

(37:22):
the common belief in the tendency to an extinction of
the families of men who work hard with the brain.
On the other hand, I shall show that the health
and energy of the scientific men are remarkably high. It
therefore seems strange that there should be a falling off
from their offspring. I have tried in many ways definding
characteristics common to those scientific men whose families were the smallest,

(37:45):
But I have only lighted upon one general result which
I give provisionally, namely that the relative deficiency of health
and energy in respect to that of their own parents
is very common among them. Their absolute health and energy
may be high, far exceeding those of people generally, but
I speak of a noticeable falling off from the yet
more robust condition of the previous generation. It is this

(38:09):
which appears to be dangerous to the continuance of the race.
My figures give the remarkable result that there are no
children at all in one out of every three of
these cases. I think that ordinary observation corroborates this conclusion,
and that those of my readers, who happen to have
mixed much in what is called intellectual society, will be

(38:30):
able to recall numerous instances of persons of both sexes,
but especially of women, possessed of high gifts of every kind,
including health and energy, but of less solid vigor than
their parents, and who have no children. I do not
overlook the fact that the scientific men are an urban population,
being mindful of results I have published elsewhere Statistical Journal

(38:53):
eighteen seventy three which show a similar diminution in the
average fertility of townsmen as compared with country folk. But
this would not account for their being less prolific than
their parents, who were also townsmen, nor for the large
number of holy sterile marriages. Heredity, the effects of education

(39:13):
and circumstances are so interwoven with those of natural character
in determining a man's position among his contemporaries that I
find it impossible to treat them wholly apart. Still less
is it possible completely to separate the evidences relating to
that portion of a man's nature which is due to
hereditary from all the rest. Heredity and many other co

(39:34):
operating causes must therefore be considered in connection. But I
feel sure that as the reader proceeds and becomes familiar
with the variety of the evidence, he will insensibly effect
for himself much of the required separation. Also, from time
to time, as opportunity may offer, I shall attempt to
draw distinctions. The study of hereditary form and features in

(39:56):
combination with character promises to be of much interes interests,
but it proved disappointing on trial, owing to the impossibility
of obtaining good historical portraits. The value of these is
further diminished by the passion of distinguished individuals to be
portrayed in uniforms, weeks, robes, or whatever voluminous drapery seems

(40:16):
most appropriate to their high office. Forgetting that all this
conceals the man, that practice might well be common of
photographing the features from different points of view, and at
different periods of life, in such a way as would
be most advantageous to a careful study of the lineaments
of the man and his family. The interest that would
attach to collections of these in after times might be

(40:38):
extremely great. End of Chapter one, Part one of English
Men of Science by Francis Kelton