us that we may depend upon the analysis of language for the fact that we are in part descended from a Lappish or other Euskarian tribe; and Mr. Isaac Taylor does not hesitate to announce that the name of Britain itself is Euskarian.* But, when we call to mind the numerous plausible meanings which have been assigned to the words Saxon, Frank, German, Pelasgian, &c., it is impossible to have faith in the signification assigned to the name of any country or people. It is by no means improbable that there may be an admixture of Turanian blood in Britain. It is by no means improbable that the Erse or Gael were a mixed people-partly Cymric, partly perhaps Turanian; but if the fact can be demonstrated at all, it cannot be satisfactorily demonstrated from comparative philology alone.

And here I had perhaps better remark once more, that where my argument is merely philological I wish it to pass for no more than a philological argument. I have insisted on the presence of a common type of language in ancient Britain and ancient Greece. I do not argue that the people among whom that type of language is still preserved must of necessity be the best representatives of the people by whom it was originally spoken. Such an argument would be in direct opposition to the objections which I have raised against the exaggerated claims of philology. A particular type of language found its way into *Words and Places, p. 60.

K

ancient Britain and into ancient Greece; and the evidence of physical and psychical characteristics renders it not improbable that the type of language was introduced into both countries by the same people or by two peoples very nearly akin. As an ethnic name for this one people, or as a generic name for the two divergent branches of this people, I use the term Cymry or High Celts; but I do not therefore mean to assert that the people now calling themselves by that name are the unmixed descendants of that original people. From the evidence brought forward in this and the following chapters, it appears that there existed in this island before the Roman invasion a people speaking a High Celtic language, possessing in many instances long and narrow heads, and endowed with psychical attributes which will be described hereafter. To this people, in order to avoid circumlocution, I give the name of Cymry. As I attach no more meaning than this to the word, my main arguments will hold good, even should subsequent researches prove it to be a misnomer.

131

CHAPTER III.

THE EVIDENCE OF PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS.

Evidence for the popular belief-The prevailing colour of the hair in England-Examination of the evidence respecting the prevailing colour of the hair among the ancient Germans, Gauls, Britons, and Anglo-Saxons-Examination of certain modern theories-General results of the investigation-Examination of the evidence respecting the stature, proportions, and general appearance of the above-mentioned ancient peoples-The modern English do not owe their stature exclusively, if at all, to the Saxons or Danes-The evidence of skulls and remains found in ancient burying-places- The Crania Britannica '-The difficulty presented by the discovery both of the long and of the short forms of skulls in the most ancient burying-places.-Evidence that the long oval skull is characteristic of the Cymry-The typical English head is also of the long oval form,while the typical Teutonic head is of the short oval form-General results of the investigation -The predecessors of the Cymry in Britain were possibly CymroTuranians, some dolichocephalic, some brachycephalic-Agreement of the physical characteristics of the ancient Greeks with those of the ancient Britons and modern English.

In the previous chapters of this Essay, the evidence for the popular belief was considered by itself before any general investigation was attempted; and it is but right that the popular belief should be treated with equal respect throughout. But in the particular branch of our subject with which we are now concerned, it will not be difficult to show that the characteristics of the English people afford not the

slightest support to the popular theory. That theory starts with two assumptions, one of which is that the Anglo-Saxons were a fair-haired, red-haired, or flaxen-haired people; and the other, that the English are a fair-haired, red-haired, or flaxen-haired people. Of these two assumptions, the first may possibly be true, or on the other hand may possibly be an exaggeration; the second is directly opposed to facts. And, so far as physical characteristics are concerned, it is almost exclusively upon the colour of the hair that the popular belief is based. The Englishman may perhaps believe that his stature exceeds the stature of other men, and that his superiority is inherited from the Anglo-Saxons. The grounds for that belief will be investigated in this chapter; but in the mean time it may be safely assumed that the average Englishman has not studied craniometry in order to satisfy himself that he is a Saxon.

And now, let us ask, are the English a fair-haired people? Can it be said that 90 per cent. of them are fair-haired? Most certainly not. But any greater proportion than 50 per cent. would perhaps constitute them a fair-haired people. And are there more than 50 per cent. of fair-haired men and women among the English? Most certainly not. There are not 40 per cent. nor 30 per cent. of even moderately light-haired people among them. They are beyond all question generally dark-haired. This same fact has already been noticed by Prichard and others, but the proportions have generally been given without any

statement of the figures which establish them. The following statistics may therefore possibly be thought of some value. It would undoubtedly be more satisfactory to have a still greater number of instances, and instances taken from all parts of the country. But it must be remembered that London may be considered the representative of England*—that it is peopled not exclusively by Londoners, but by natives of all parts of the country. And it should also be stated that the proportions of different colours observed on any given day varied not very considerably from those observed on any other given day. It is therefore perhaps not unfair to assume that the percentage of the different colours is arrived at approximately at least, if not with minute accuracy. It should also be stated that wherever there was a doubt, the light-haired class received the benefit of it; and

* This assertion is based upon the best possible evidence. Upon reference to the Population Abstract published in 1843 (Census 1841), when railroads were in their infancy, it will be seen that of the inhabitants of Middlesex, 490,513 were born in other counties, and 967,166 in the county itself, while of the inhabitants of Surrey, 224,590 were born in other counties, and 329,473 in the county itself. From these statistics we may infer that few Londoners have an exclusively London ancestry. It is true that these figures may convey an exaggerated idea of the immigration into London from remote districts, because the two counties in which London principally stands are without doubt constantly interchanging their inhabitants. But if we make the most liberal allowance for this source of error, we may still look upon London as the representative of the whole country. The Census returns tell us further, that the intermixture of the population is becoming very general throughout the length and breadth of the island.