STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS HAVE LOCK ELUi BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME * FROM THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND ^ THE GIFT OF * 1S91 .-< A.^a^SffS 9^sl\l\cft!'/, 5901 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/cletails/cu31924082461165 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS BY THE SAME AUTHOR, THE CRIMINAL. Revised and enlarged edition. MAN AND WOMAN. Revised and enlarged edition. STUDIES IN THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SEX. Vols. I.— III. THE NEW SPIRIT. AFFIRMATIONS. THE NUSTETEENTH CENTURY: A Dialogue in UXOPIA't A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS BY Havelock Ellis LONDON HURST AND BLACKETT, LIMITED 13, Great Marlborough Street, W. 1904 All rights reserved 13 PREFACE, For many years past material has been growing under my hands bearing on the psychological and anthropolo- gical characters of genius, and from time to time I have examined these data and reached certain, more or less secure, conclusions. These conclusions, together with a summary of the material on which they are founded, I hope to set forth in a series of volumes. In the meanwhile, however, I am absorbed in another task, which will yet take some years to complete, and since life is short I have thought it well not to delay longer the publication of the first of my studies of genius. It deals with a subject which can scarcely fail to be of interest to most of us, even apart from the biological questions involved, and, as it stands, it seems to illustrate by a single concrete example of the first importance — the genius of Great Britain — many of the special characteristics of genius generally. In the past the phenomena of genius have mostly been approached from two distinct standpoints. In the first place they were dealt with by alienists who, being impressed by the fact that certain men of eminent genius had pre- viii PREFACE. sented symptoms which may properly be termed insane, became unduly inclined to attribute insanity to the mani- festations of genius generally. On the other hand the subject has more recently been taken up by anthropologists who have ignored altogether the psychiatric, and even for the most part the psychological, aspects of genius. Mr. Galton is the earliest and the most distinguished exponent of this highly important aspect of the study of genius. In the Prefatory Chapter to the second edition (1892) of Hereditary Genius Mr. Galton has admitted that it is not the only aspect, stating that some place must be given to the study of genius as a mental anomaly, an "inborn excitability and peculiarity." My own attempt to investigate the phenomena of genius may be said to start from the point where Mr. Galton's left off (though my standpoint was reached some years before 1892). My method of approaching the group corresponds, so far as the data allow, with that which in France Dr. Toulouse has recently adopted so brilliantly and thoroughly (notably in his study of Zola) in approaching the individual man of genius. From the purely psychiatric standpoint, from the purely anthropological standpoint, it is alike impossible to interpret the phenomena of genius adequately. The methods which are instructive in the lunatic asylum, or those other methods (such as under Dr. Haddon's initiating influence have been carried out by Dr. Browne in the islands of the west of Ireland) which prove fruitful in PREFACE. ix isolated communities of the normal population are here both out of place. In a study of genius which is biological in the widest sense of that term, we must ascertain alike the psychological data and the anthropological data, normal and abnormal, and seek to balance them steadily, without swerving unduly either to the right hand or to the left. The plan of the present book is simple. The bulk of the volume is taken up with the succinct co-ordination and summation of the data before us, all introduction of foreign matter which might unduly overweight the conclusions at any point being strictly excluded. In small type are inserted the results obtained by previous investigators on somewhat similar bodies of data, together with the results obtained by the study of other mentally abnormal groups ; these results are often of the highest significance in enabling us to interpret our conclusions. In the Appen- dices I have brought together some of the elementary facts on which I have worked ; the reader is thus enabled to examine and check my methods for himself ; he will also, I hope, be able at many points to correct or amplify the original data. I had purposed to represent the results of this study graphically by means of curves. On consideration, how- ever, it seemed that such a method was unsuited to the nature of the data, and might tend to mislead the reader. For most of the groups of facts here dealt with the data X PREFACE. are necessarily incomplete, and although a more thorough sifting of the sources would certainly yield further facts, they would in the end still remain incomplete. It is unde- sirable to give an air of precision to data which we have indeed good reason to consider approximately correct, but which at the same time do not enable us to reach the exact composition of the whole of the groups we are dealing with. HAVELOCK ELLIS. Carbis Water, Lelant, Cornwall. CONTENTS. I. INTRODUCTORY. FAOS The problem to be investigated — The method of investigation — The Dictionary of National Biography — The principle ruling the selec- tion of names — Cattell's method of selection— Reasons for the principles here adopted — Proportion of eminent women to eminent men — The distribution of intellectual ability in the various cen- turies — The biological data with which the present inquiry is chiefly concerned — Fallacies to be avoided i II. NATIONALITY AND RACE. The determination of place of origin — Birthplaces of grandparents the best available criteria — Relative productiveness in genius of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland — The group of mixed British origin — ^The group of mixed British and foreign origin — Importance of the French element — Origins of eminent British women — The distribution of English genius according to counties — The genius of Kent — The regional distribution of British women of ability — The probable predominance of Norfolk and Suffolk in relative amount of ability — The three great foci of English genius — The East Anglian focus— The apparent poverty of London in aboriginal genius — The south-western focus — The Welsh Border— The Anglo-Danish district— The psychological character- xii CONTENTS. istics of East Anglian genius — The characteristics of the south-west focus — The characteristics of the Welsh Border — The significance of the position of Kent — The distribution of genius in Wales — The distribution of genius in Scotland — The distribution of genius in Ireland — The regional distribution of various kinds of ability — The distribution of scientific ability — The regional variations of scientific aptitude — The distribution of eminent soldiers — The dis- tribution of eminent sailors — The distribution of artists — The dis- tribution of dramatic ability — The possible modification of racial factors by environmental conditions 20 III. SOCIAL CLASS. Status of parents of British men of genius — Upper class — Yeomen and farmers — Clergy — Medicine — Law — Army — Navy — Miscellaneous professions — Commercial classes — Crafts — ^Artisans and unskilled — The parentage of artists — The parentage of actors — How far change has taken place in the social composition of the genius- producing class — Comparison of the genius-producing class with the ordinary population • 77 IV, HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. The tendency to heredity in intellectual ability — Inheritance of ability equally frequent through father and mother — Mental abnormality in the parents — Size of the families to which persons of eminent ability belong — Normal standards of comparison — Genius-producing families tend to be large — Men of ability tend to be the offspring of predominantly boy-producing parents — Women of ability appar- ently tend to belong to girl -producing parents — Position in the family of the child of genius — Tendency of men of ability to be youngest and more especially eldest children — The age of the parents of eminent persons at their birth — Tendency to disparity of age in the parents g^ CONTENTS. xiii V. CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. The frequency of constitutional delicacy in infancy and childhood — Tendency of those who were weak in infancy to become robust latere— The prevalence of precocity — University education — The frequency of prolonged residence abroad in early life . . .133 VI, MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. Celibacy — Average ^e at marriage — Tendency to marry late — ^Age of eminent women at marriage — Apparently a greater tendency to celibacy among persons of ability than among the ordinary popu- lation — Marris^e — Fertility and sterility alike pronounced — Average size of families — Proportion of children.of each sex . . 152 VII. DURATION OF LIFE. The fallacy involved in estimating the longevity of eminent men — The real bearing of the data — Mortality at different ages . . .171 VIII. PATHOLOGY. Relative ill-health — Consumption — The psychology of consumption — Gout — Its extreme frequency in men of ability — The possible reasons for the association between gout and ability — Other uric acid diseases — Asthma and angina pectoris — Insanity — The question of its significance — Apparent rarity of grave nervous diseases — Frequency of minor nervous disorders — Stammering — Its signifi- cance — High-pitched voice — Spasmodic movements — Illegible handwriting — Short sight — Awkwardness of movement . . -177 IX. STATURE. Nature of the data — Tendency of British men of ability to vary from the average in the direction of short and more especially of tall stature — Apparent deficiency of the medium-sized 204 XIV CONTENTS. X. PIGMENTATION. FAGB Hair and eye-colour — Method of classification — Sources of data — The index of pigmentation — Its marked variation in the different intellectual groups — Some probable causes for this variation . . 209 XI. OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. Personal beauty or the reverse — The eyes — Shyness and timidity- Tendency to melancholy — Persecution by the world XII. CONCLUSIONS. The characteristics of men of genius probably to a large extent indepen- dent of the particular field their ability is shown in — What is the "temperament" of genius? — In what sense genius is healthy — The probable basis of inaptitude for ordinary life — In what sense genius is a neurosis 217 224 APPENDICES. List of Eminent Persons of Ability . Origins of British Persons of Ability Occupation or Social Position of Fathers Stature .... . . . . Pigmentation 237 252 281 290 292 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. INTRODUCTORY. The problem to be investigated— The method of investigation— The Die- tioTutry of National Biography— The. principles ruling the selection of names — Cattell's method of selection— Reasons for the principles here adopted— Proportion of eminent women to eminent men— The distribution of intellectual ability in the various centuries— The biological data with which the present inquiry is chiefly concerned— Fallacies to be avoided. Until now it has not been possible to obtain any comprehensive view of the men and women who have chiefly built up English civihzation. It has not, therefore, been possible to study their per- sonal characteristics as a group. The sixty-six volumes of the Dictionary of National Biography have for the first time enabled us to construct an authoritative and well-balanced scheme of the persons of illustrious genius, in every department, who have appeared in the British Isles from the beginning of history down to the end of the nine- 2 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. teenth century ; and, with a certain amount of labour, they assist us to sum up their main traits. It has seemed to me worth while, — both for the sake of ascertaining the composition of those elements of intellectual ability which Great Britain has contributed to the world, and also as a study of the nature of genius generally, — to utilize the Dictionary to work out these traits. I propose to present here some of the main conclusions which emerge from such a study. The Dictionary contains some record, — from a few Unes to several dozen pages, — of some thirty thousand persons. Now, this is an impracticable and undesirable number to deal with — imprac- ticable because, regarding a large proportion of these persons, very little is here recorded or is even known ; undesirable because it must be admitted that the majority, though persons of a certain note in their own day or their own circle, cannot be said to have made any remarkable contribution to civilization or to have displayed any very transcendent degree of native ability. My first task, therefore, was to discover a prin- ciple of selection in accordance with which the persons of relatively less distinguished ability and achievement might be eliminated. At the out- set one class of individuals, it was fairly obvious, should be omitted altogether in the construction INTRODUCTORY. of any group in which the quaUties of native intellectual ability are essential : royalty, and members of the royal family, as well as the heredi- tary nobiUty. Those eminent persons, the sons of commoners, who have founded noble families, are, of course, not excluded by this rule, according to which any eminent person whose father, at the time of his birth, had attained the rank of baronet or any higher rank, is necessarily excluded from my list. Certainly the son of a king or a peer may possess a high degree of native abiUty, but it is practically impossible to estimate how far that ability would have carried him had he been the son of an ordinary citizen ; it might be main- tained that a successful merchant, ship-owner, schoolmaster or tradesman requires as much sagacity and mental alertness as even the most successful sovereign ; by eliminating those indi- viduals in whom the accident of birth counts for so much, we put this insoluble question out of court. I am surprised to find how few persons of obviously pre-eminent ability are excluded by this rule, and many whom, at first, one would imagine it excludes, it really allows to pass, especially in the case of sons born before the father was created a peer. In order to avoid any scandalous omissions, I have thought it well to rule in all those sons of peers whose abihty 4 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. has clearly been of a kind which could not be aided by position and influence ; thus I have included the third Earl of Shaftesbury, for it cannot be held that the possession of an earldom tends to aid a man in becoming a philosopher. It has, however, very rarely indeed been necessary to accord this privilege ; I have always refrained from according it in the case of soldiers and statesmen. Having eliminated those whose position in the world has clearly been influenced by the accident of birth, it remained to eliminate those whose place in the world, as well as in the Dictionary, was comparatively small. After some considera- tion I decided that, generally speaking, those persons to whom less than three pages were allotted were evidently not regarded by the editors, and could scarcely be generally regarded, as of the first rank of eminence. Accordingly, I excluded all those individuals to whom less than that amount of space was devoted. When this was done, however, I found it necessary to go through the Dictionary again, treating this rule in a some- what more liberal manner. I had so far obtained some 700 names, but I had excluded many per- sons of undoubtedly very eminent ability and achievement ; Hutton, the geologist, and Jane Austen, the novelist, for instance, could scarcely INTRODUCTORY. S be omitted from a study of British genius. It was evident that persons with eventful lives had a better chance of occupjdng much space than other persons of equal abiUty with uneventful lives. Moreover, I found that a somewhat rigid adherence to the rule I had laid down had sometimes resulted in groups that were too small and too ill-balanced to be useful for study. In the case of musical composers, for instance, while those of recent times, of whom much is known, bulk largely in the Dictionary, the earlier musicians, of whom Uttle is known, though their eminence is much greater, were excluded from my list. On the other hand, a certain number of persons had been included because, though of quite ordinary abiUty (hke Bradshaw, the regicide), they happened by acci- dent to have played a considerable part in history. In going through the Dictionary a second time, therefore, I modified my hst in accordance with a new rule, to the effect that biographies occupy- ing less than three pages should be included if the writers seemed to consider that their subjects had shown intellectual abiUty of a high order, and that those occupying more space should be ex- cluded if the writers considered that their sub- jects displayed no high intellectual ability. In this way I ehminated those persons who rank chiefly as villains (like Titus Oates), and have 6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. little claim to the possession of any eminent degree of intellectual ability. I likewise felt compelled to exclude women (like Lady Hamil- ton) whose fame is not due to intellectual ability, but to beauty and to connection with eminent persons. I also omitted one or two persons for the reason that, although their claim to inclusion was unimpeachable, we are not in possession of a single definite biographical fact concerning them ; from the present point of view they would merely cumber the ground. So far as possible, it will be seen, I have sought to subordinate my own private judgment in making the selection. It has been my object to place the list, so far as possible, on an objective basis. At the same time, it is evident that, while I only reserved to myself a casting vote on doubt- ful points, there was inevitably a certain propor- tion of cases where this personal vote had to be given. A purely mechanical method of making selections would necessarily lead to various ab- surdities, and all that I can claim is that the principles of selection I adopted have involved a minimum of interference on my part. It is certainly true that, even after much consideration and repeated revision, I remain myself still in doubt regarding a certain proportion of people included in my Hst and a certain proportion INTRODUCTORY. omitted. Indeed any reader who finds on going through my list that there are certain omitted names which most certainly ought to have been included, and certain included names which might well be omitted, will have reached precisely the conclusion which I have myself reached. How- ever often I went through the Dictionary, I know that I should each time make a few trifling re- adjustments, and any one else who took the trouble to go over the ground I have traversed would hkewise wish to make readjustments. But I am convinced that if my principles of selection are accepted, the margin for such readjustment is narrow. It wiU be observed that, by means of a sUghtly complicated and so far as possible objective method of selection, I have not merely sought to include only individuals of a very high order of intellectual ability, but have at the same time sought to avoid, so far as possible, the omission of others who may have an equal claim to inclu- sion on account of their possession of a high degree of intellectual abiHty. It will at the same time be observed that I do not claim to be absolutely successful either as regards the inclusions or the omissions. I must hasten to add that any failure here very slightly impairs the primary object of this study. It has not been my main 8 ri STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. object to attain a final list to date of those British men and women who have shown the highest degree of intellectual ability. I wished to ascertain some of the biological characteristics — anthropological and psychological — of persons of the highest intellectual ability produced by Great Britain. For this purpose it was essential that the list should be carefully and impartially obtained ; it was not essential that it should be faultless, although that was the ideal I set before myself. There is some interest in comparing my list with an- other list, prepared by Professor Cattell, of the i,ooo most eminent men that have appeared in the world generally (J. McKeen Cattell, "A Statistical Study of Eminent Men," Popular Science Monthly, Feb., 1903). Professor Cattell, in constructing the list, adhered rigidly to the very simple and mechanical method of selection which I had at first proposed to follow, but, as has been above explained, found it desirable in some degree to modify by the adoption of additional rules of selection. He took six biographical dictionaries — Eng- lish, French, German, and American — and, reducing space to a common standard, selected the 1,000 persons who were allowed the greatest average space, inclusion in at least three of the dictionaries being regarded as an essential condition. The Ust was thus, so far as Professor CatteU was concerned, absolutely objective. Of Professor Cattell's 1,000 most eminent persons, 243, or nearly a quarter, appear to be British or to have INTRODUCTORY. flourished in Great Britain. Of these as many as at least 60 are not found in my list. (As the names in Professor Cattell's list appear without dates, the identifi- cation is not always quite certain.) Of these 60, 33 were excluded from my list as royal personages, and 20 as belonging to the hereditary aristocracy. There remain 7 who, since they thus figure among the 1,000 most eminent persons who ever lived, ought surely to appear in my longer Hst of purely British persons. One, Jeffreys, was excluded because, although he may not have been without legal abihty, the space which he occupies in the minds of men is not due to his ability, but to the scandal which he caused ; he lives rather as a bad man than as a man of genius. In a somewhat similar manner, Mac- pherson, who appears in Professor Cattell's list but not in mine, was excluded because, although he occupies an important position in literary history, his contribu- tions to literature have their main value from the traditions they embody ; he is an insignificant character who accidently aroused great controversies, and showed little or no ability in his undoubtedly original literary work. Another, Thomas Brown, is a metaphysician, who, at all events in the Dictionary, is regarded as of little importance. Another, Robert HaU, was a Baptist preacher who left a reputation for pulpit oratory. The remaining three — Arbuthnot, Armstrong, and Akenside — are minor literary men whose productions are now unread, though it is possible that one, Armstrong, is undeservedly neglected. I do not consider that the exclusion of these seven persons reveals a very serious defect in my list, even though it may well be that a few individuals have found their way into my list who showed intellectual ability that was of but Uttle higher order. 10 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. An examination of Professor Cattell's list suffices to show how extremely difficult it is to obtain a reliable estimate of intellectual eminence on a simple objective basis. A test which places Napoleon HI; as the eleventh greatest man that ever lived — before Homer, Newton, and Alexander the Great — and includes some unread minor poets, while it excludes Gilbert, " the father of experimental science," is scarcely satisfactory. It is certainly better than a subjective method, but its results seem to justify such an attempt as I have made, however imperfectly, to adopt a more complexly objective method of selection. In the final result my selection yields 975 British men of a high degree of intellectual emi- nence. The eminent women number 55, being in proportion to the men about i to 18. A slightly lower standard of abiUty, it would appear, prevails among the women than among the men. On account of the greater rarity of intellectual ability in women, they have often played a large part in the world on the strength of achievements which would not have allowed a man to play a similarly large part. It seemed, again, impossible to exclude various women of powerful and influential personaUty, though their achievements were not always consider- able. I allude to such persons as Hannah More and Mrs. Montague. Even Mrs. Somerville, the only feminine representative of science in my INTRODUCTORY. ii list, could scarcely be included were she not a woman, for she was Uttle more than the accom- plished popularizer of scientific results. In one department, and one only, the women seem to be little, if at all, inferior to the men in ability, that is in acting. Professor Cattell finds the proportion of women in his list of the most eminent persons of history generally to be 3.2 per cent., while in my British list it is higher, being 5.3 per cent. This is a difference which might have been anticipated, since my hst refers only to post-classical times, includes persons of a lower degree of eminence, and is concerned with a people among whom the conditions have possibly been more than usually favourable to the development of ability in women. It may be asked how these 1,030 persons of pre-eminent intellectual abihty have been dis- tributed through the course of English history. I find that from the fourth to the tenth centuries, inclusive, there are only 11 men of sufficient dis- tinction to appear in my lists, nearly half of these belonging to the seventh century. From that date onwards (reckoning by the date of birth) we find that the eleventh century yields 5, the twelfth yields 11, the thirteenth 9, the fourteenth 16, the fifteenth 32, the sixteenth 161, the seven- teenth 191, the eighteenth 372, the nineteenth 223. It is probable that the estimate most nearly 12 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. corresponds to the actual facts as regards the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Before that time our information is too scanty, so that many men of notable abiUty have passed away without record. In the nineteenth century, on the other hand, the material has been too copious, and the national biographers have prob- ably tended to become unduly appreciative of every faint manifestation of intellectual ability. The extraordinary productiveness of the eigh- teenth century is very remarkable. In order to realize the significance of the facts, however, a century is too long a period. Distributing our persons of genius into half-century periods, I find that the following groups are formed : II01-II50 4 1151-1200 7 1201-1250 2 1251-1300 7 1301-1350 6 1351-1400 10 1401-1450 6 1451-1500 26 1501-1550 49 1551-1600 112 1601-1650 112 1651-1700 79 I 701 -I 750 134 1751-1800 238 1801-1830 219 Only four individuals belong to the second half of the nineteenth century. It is scarcely neces- sary to remark that the record for the first half INTRODUCTORY. 13 of the nineteenth century is still incomplete. Taking the experience of the previous century as a basis, it may be estimated that some 35 per cent, of the eminent persons belonging to the first half of the nineteenth century are still alive. This would raise that half-century to the first place, but it may be pointed out that the increase on the previous half-century would be compara- tively small, and also that the result must be discounted by the inevitable tendency to over- estimate the men of recent times. We have to accept the perspective by which near things look large and remote things look small, but we must not be duped by it. When we bear in mind that the activities of the individuals in each of these groups really fall, on the whole, into the succeeding period, certain interesting points are suggested. We note how the waves of Humanism and Reformation, when striking the shores of Britain, have stirred intel- lectual activity, and have been prolonged and intensified in the delayed English Renaissance. We see how this fermentation has been continued in the political movements of the middle of the seventeenth century, and we note the influence of the European upheaval at the end of the eighteenth century. The extraordinary outburst of intellect in the second half of that century is 14 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. accentuated by the fact that, taking into account all entries in the Dictionary, the gross number of eminent men of the low standard required for inclusion shows little increase in the eighteenth century (5,789, as against 5,674 in the preceding century, is the editor's estimate) ; the increase of ability is thus in quaUty rather than in quan- tity. It is curious to note that, throughout these eight centuries, a marked rise in the level of in- tellectual ability has very frequently, though not invariably, been preceded by a marked fall. It is also noteworthy that in every century, from the eleventh to the eighteenth, with the ex- ception of the seventeenth, the majority of its great men have been born in the latter half ; that is to say, that the beginning of a century tends to be marked by an outburst of genius, which declines through the century. Omitting the nineteenth century, 487 persons were born in the second halves of the centuries, and only 323 in the first halves. This outburst is very dis- tinct at the beginning of the nineteenth century, and, as we have seen reason to believe, it was probably succeeded by an arrest, if not a decline, in the production of genius. It would seem that we are here in the presence of two factors : a spontaneous rhythmical rise and fall in the pro- duction of genius, so that a period of what is INTRODUCTORY. iS improperly called " decadence " is followed by one of expansive activity ; and also, at the same time, the stimulating influence of great historical events, calling out latent intellectual energy. These considerations, however, are merely specu- lative, and it is sufficient to accord them this brief passing notice. It is noteworthy that the progress of European ability generally, as illustrated by Professor Cattell's results, has followed very much the same curve as I have found in the case of British genius. " Following the extra- ordinary development of the two nations of antiquity," Professor CatteU writes, summarising his own diagrams, "we have a decline, not sudden, .... but the light fails towards the fifth century. The curve shows a rise towards the tenth century, increasing in rapidity as it proceeds. There are three noticeable breaks. Thus in the fourteenth century there was a pause fol- lowed by a gradual improvement and an extraordinary fruition at the end of the fifteenth century There was a pause in progress until a century later. . . . . The latter part of the seventeenth century was a sterile period, followed by a revival culminating in the French revolution." For Europe generally, as for Great Britain, the latter half of the eighteenth cen- tury represents the imquestionable climax of genius, 238 inividuals belonging to the eighteenth century altogether as against less than one hundred for the previous century. Professor Cattell's curve also shows the same general tendency for genius to become produc- tive towards the end of each CMitury, with the same very i6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. marked exception in the case of the seventeenth century, the fall here, Pofessor Cattell finds, extending to nearly every department of intellectual abiUty. In England we might have been tempted to attribute the fall to the social disturbance caused by the Civil Wars, but since it was a general European phenomenon (except in Ger- many, where the eighteenth century expansion began earliest) this is impossible ; it represents a period of rest between the unparalleled activity of the late six- teenth and early seventeenth century, and the still more unexampled intellectual energy of the eighteenth century. When the list of eminent persons had at last been completed my task had still scarcely begun. It was my object to obtain as large a mass as possible of biological data — anthroppl6gical and psychological — so that I could deal with these persons of eminent intellectual abihty as a human group and compare them with other human groups, normal and abnormal. I had, somewhat too innocently, assumed that the national biog- raphers would usually be able to furnish the elementary data I required, whenever such data were extant. I soon realised, however, that the biographers were, with a few notable exceptions, literary men, unfamihar with biological methods, and that they had seldom realised that biography is not a purely Uterary recreation, and that it demands something more than purely literary INTRODUCTORY. 17 aptitudes. Method was, for the most part, con- spicuously absent ; if, for instance, one wished to know if an eminent man had or had not been married, it was frequently necessary to read through the whole article to make sure that one had not missed a reference to this point ; when found, one was still left frequently in doubt as to whether or not there had been offspring of the marriage, and when no reference to marriage could be found one was left in doubt as to whether this meant that there had been no marriage, or that the point was unknown, or simply that the bio- grapher had forgotten to refer to the matter. This failure of precision in regard to so elemen- tary a biographical fact introduced into the con- sideration of a very important matter a margin of error which I have had much difficulty in controlling, and it still remains considerable. Again, much trouble has been caused by the persistent vagueness of the biographers in des- cribing the eminent man's position in his father's family. There is distinct interest in knowing the size of the family from which the great man sprang and his precise position in that family ; but the biographers, in possibly the majority of cases, use such expressions as " eldest son," " second son," " youngest son," which tell us almost nothing. A brief personal description of i8 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. the eminent man, onee more, is always very in- structive for biological purposes, and when the great man lived several centuries ago the bio- grapher is usually careful to reproduce any scrap of information bearing on this point. But no such care is shown in the case of the more modem persons concerning whom the in- formation obtainable is still copious, and even when the biographer has personally known his subject he omits, almost as a rule, to give any information regarding his personal appearance. These and the like imperfections might easily have been avoided, and the value of the Dictionary immensely increased, had the editors adopted the fairly obvious device of issuing a few simple instructions to their feUow-workers on the ques- tion of method. The greatest part of my labour has been due to these defects of the Dictionary of National Biography in respect of those biological data which necessarily form the central and most essential part of biography. In order to supple- ment the information furnished by the Dictionary I have consulted over three hundred biographies, as well as many other sources of information in memoirs, personal reminiscences, etc. In regard to some of the more recent persons included I have been able to fill in various facts from my INTRODUCTORY. 19 own knowledge. As concerns eye and hair colour I have made a systematic examination of several picture galleries, more especially the National Portrait Gallery. Having thus explained the nature of the data with which we have to deal, and the methods by which it has been obtained, we may now pro- ceed, without further explanations, to investigate it. We have to study the chief biological charac- teristics — anthropological and psychological — of the most eminent British men and women of genius, here using that word merely to signify high intellectual ability. 2* 20 II NATIONALITY AND RACE. The determination of place of origin — Birthplaces of grandparents the best available criteria — Relative productiveness in genius of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland — The group of mixed British origin — ^The group of mixed British and foreign origin — Importance of the French element — Origins of eminent British women — The distribution of English genius according to counties — The genius of Kent — The regional distribution of English women of ability — The probable predominance of Norfolk and Suffolk in relative amount of ability — The three great foci of English genius — The East Anglian focus — The apparent poverty of London in aboriginal genius — The south-western focus — The Welsh Border — The Anglo-Danish district — The psychological characteristics of East Anglian genius — ^The characteristics of the South-western focus — ^The characteristics of the Welsh Border — The significance of the position of Kent — The distri- bution of genius in Wales — The distribution of genius in Scotland — The distribution of genius in Ireland — The regional distribution of various kinds of ability — The distribution of scientific ability — The regional variations of scientific aptitude — The distribution of eminent soldiers — ^The distribution of eminent sailors — The distribution of artists — The distribu- tion of dramatic ability — The possible modification of racial factors by environmental conditions. It is scarcely necessary to remark that nation- ality and race, when used as distinguishing marks of people who all belong to the British Islands, are not identical terms and are both vague. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 21 The races — however we may describe them* — constituting the people of Great Britain are to be found in all the main divisions of the two islands, and the fact that a man is English or Scotch or Irish tells us nothing positive as to his race. Some indication of race, however, is in many cases furnished if we know the particular district to which a man's ancestors belonged, and this indication is further strengthened if we can ascertain his physical type. In determining on a large scale the place of origin of men of genius the usual method hitherto has been to adopt the crude plan of noting the birthplace. I have so far as possible discarded this method, for a man's birthplace obviously tells us nothing decisive as to bis real place of origin. It has seemed to me that a man's place of origin can most accurately be determined by considering the districts to which his four grand- parents belonged. If we know this we know with considerable certainty in what parts of the country he is really rooted, and in many cases we can thus form an estimate of his probable race. I have expended a very considerable amount of time and trouble over this part of * For an admirable and lucid summary of the present position of this question, see Ripley's Races of Europe, ch. xii. 22 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. my enquiry ; yet so vague, confused, or con- flicting is often the available evidence that pro- bably none of my groups of data contain so many slight inaccuracies as this. It is only in a very small proportion of cases (even when the infor- mation derived from the Dictionary is supple- mented) that I have been able to determine the origins of all four grandparents ; I have usually considered myself fortunate when I have been- able to tell where the father and mother came from, and have often been vvell content merely to find out where the father came from. Only in a few cases have I admitted the evidence of birthplace.* London as a birthplace has been ignored altogether. When the facts are avail- able it is nearly always found that the parents had migrated to London ; we may reasonably assume that this is probably the case when the facts are not available. It very rarely occurs (as in the case of J. Bentham) that even one grand- parent belonged to London. In order to represent the varying values of this evidence, I have adopted a system of marks. If the four grandparents are of known origin, an eminent man is entitled to four marks, these * This evidence varies in value ; in the case of an eminent person whose father was a farmer it is fairly acceptable ; but if the father was a clergyman it has little or no value. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 23 marks being divided among the counties to which he belongs ; when the evidence is less explicit the marks are correspondingly diminished. By this method I am able to give due weight to the very numerous cases in which the parents (or grandparents) belonged to different parts of the kingdom. Every one of the 1,030 persons included in •this inquiry may be definitely classed, with at all events a fair degree of probability, in one part or another of the British Islands. When this is done we obtain the following results : English 659 Welsh 28 Scotch ..... 137 Irish 63 Mixed British .... 97 Mixed British and Foreign . 46 Omitting for the moment the individuals of mixed ancestry, we find that 74.2 per cent, are English, 3.1 Welsh, 15.4 Scotch and 7.1 Irish. If we take the basis of the present population and regard the proportion of eminent persons pro- duced by England as the standard, Wales has produced slightly less than her share of persons of ability, Ireland still less, and Scotland de- cidedly more than her share. 24 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. As regards Wales we have to bear in mind the difficulty of a language not recognised as a medium of civilisation. As regards Scotland we probably have to recognise that intellectual apti- tudes are especially marked among the Scotch, and also that the tendency has been fostered by circumstances, since, as is well known, the low- land Scotch are almost identical in racial composi- tion with the northern English, and there are no artificial barriers of language. On the other hand, the Irish have been seriously hampered by geographical and to some extent by Unguistic barriers, as well as by unfortunate political cir- cumstances, in contributing their due share to British civilisation. ' Mr. A. H. H. Maclean has shown {Where We get Our Best Men, London, 1900) that of some 2,500 British persons of ability belonging to the nineteenth century 70 per cent, are English, 18 per cent. Scotch, 10 per cent. Irish, and 2 per cent. Welsh. We thus find that, by taking a much lower standard of ability and confining ourselves to the most recent period, Scotland stands higher than ever, whUe Ireland benefits very greatly at the expense of both England and Wales. This is probably not altogether an unexpected result. It is on the whole confirmed by an analysis of British Men of the Time, made by Dr. (now Sir) Conan Doyle {Nine- teenth Century, Aug., 1888). Both Mr. Maclean and Sir Conan Doyle^adopted NATIONALITY AND RACE. 25 the crude test of birthplace. The somewhat higher place which they give to the Irish is, however, really confirmed by the analysis of my results. At an earlier stage of my inquiry, when the standard of ability adopted was higher, and the most recent group of eminent persons (those included in the supplement to the Dictionary of National Biography) had not been added, I found that the Enghsh contribution was larger, and the Irish smaller, than I now find it. It appears evident that possibly with some lowering of the standard of ability, and certainly with the advent of modern times, the Irish contribution tends to reach a larger proportion. When we turn to consider the 143 persons who are of mixed British, or mixed foreign and British, race, we find that they may be divided as follows : English and Irish English and Scotch Enghsh and Welsh Mixed British, other than above British and Foreign . 33 30 25 9 46 In percentages these results are : English and Irish, 23 ; English and Scotch, 20.9 ; Enghsh and Welsh, 17.4 ; other British, 6.2 ; British and Foreign, 32.1. We here reach the interesting result that notwithstanding the extreme frequency of English-Scotch marriages, and the very high proportion of ability among the unmixed Scotch, 26 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. the English-Irish group stands, even absolutely, above the English-Scotch group, while the English- Welsh group is still more largely out of proportion with the small pure Welsh group, and is not far behind the English-Scotch group. It would appear that, so far as ability is concerned, the Irish and the Welsh are much better adapted for crossing with the English than are the more closely related Scotch. There are forty-six persons in whom one Or more elements of foreign blood are mingled with one or more British elements. These do not, of course, include all the foreigners who have played a part in English civilisation, since no person of purely foreign blood was taken into account in the preparation of my list. This has, for instance, led to the omission of numerous early Normans (like Beckett), some later French Huguenots (like Romilly), and several eminent Jews. Even though the purely French persons of eminence are omitted, the French elements re- main distinctly the most important. At least seventeen of our forty-six individuals of partly foreign origin have had a French parent or grand- parent. Some of these were Huguenots. No account has been taken of ancestors beyond the grandparents, but a Huguenot ancestral element seemingly more remote than the grandparents is NATIONALITY AND RACE. 27 certainly of very frequent occurrence ; I have noted it in seventeen cases, and it certainly occurs much oftener. Other remote Huguenot elements (especially Walloon, Flemish and Dutch) occur with only less frequency. German parents and grandparents only occur ten times ; the Dutch and Flemish, occurring eight times, are but little behind, while five of our eminent persons were partly Italian. The exact combinations, with the number of times of their occurrence, are as follow : — English and French 12 English and German . 8 English and Dutch 5 English and Italian 3 English and Flemish . 2 Scotch and French 2 English, Irish, French and Swiss 2 English and Russian . I English and Danish I Enghsh, Irish and German . I Irish and French . I Irish and ItaUan . I Irish and Spanish . I Enghsh, Irish and ItaUan . I Scotch and Dutch . . . . I Irish and Austrian . I 28 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. English, Scotch and German Welsh and Swiss . Welsh and Italian . I I I There is much interest in considering separately the places of origin of the 55 eminent women on our list. Of these 29 are English, 4 Scotch, 4 Irish, and 18 of mixed origin. The obvious points to note here are the very remarkable preva- lence of women of mixed race (in the proportion of 32 per cent, instead of only 13 per cent, as in the case of our eminent persons generally), and the rise of Ireland to equality with Scotland. When we analyse the eighteen mixed cases the same prevalence of the Irish element appears in a very much more marked form. The various mixtures are as follows : — English and Irish 8 Enghsh and Scotch 2 Enghsh and Welsh 2 English and French 2 English and Italian I English, Irish and German . I English, Irish and Itahan . I English, Irish, French and Swiss I Here we see that while an English element enters into every combination, in not less than NATIONALITY AND RACE. 29 eleven of the eighteen cases it is combined with an Irish element. The Scotch element reaches no higher a level than the Welsh and is even inferior to the French. Among our eminent persons generally not more than one in fifteen is Irish ; among the eminent women more .than ^ one in four is Irish, while Scotland, which has pro- duced relatively the largest share of eminent men, has produced relatively the smallest share of eminent women. So far we have been concerned solely with the distribution of our eminent ability in the main divisions of the United Kingdom. There is, however, much interest in determining the distri- bution of ability within these main divisions. The obvious, and indeed the inevitable, basis for this part of the inquiry is the division into coun- ties. It is, however, a very awkward and incon- venient basis. The counties are very unequal in size, usually too small, and in most cases they correspond to no ancient boundaries. They have neither the historical significance of the ancient French provinces, nor the practical convenience of the modern French departments. The ancient English dioceses furnish on the whole a better basis and one that for the most part corresponds to real ancient divisions ; * but it was obviously * See e.g. G. Hill, English Dioceses. 30 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. inconvenient and inadvisable to fall back on an extinct division of the country. It was neces- sary to be content with the county basis and to seek so far as possible to minimise its disad- vantages. In -the first place the Enghsh counties may be presented in accordance with the absolute number of elements of abiUty which each possesses, with no attempt to show the significance of the numbers. It will, of course, be remembered (and may be clearly seen by reference to Appendix B) that in consequence of the imperfection of our knowledge these elements are of disparate value, so that while one individual may be counted four times (i.e., once for each of his grandparents), another may only be counted once. Most indi- viduals are counted twice. Yorkshire 90 Norfolk 67 Devon 56 Kent . 51 Suffolk 50 Lancashire . 43 Lincolnshire 37 Somerset 30 Cornwall 30 Gloucestershire 28 NATIONALITY AND RACE. 31 Essex 27 Warwickshire 26 Shropshire . 24 Staffordshire 24 Wiltshire 24 Northumberland 20 Worcestershire 20 Derbyshire 19 Cheshire 19 Dorset 19 Hampshire 19 Buckinghamshire 19 Northamptonshire 18 Hertfordshire 18 Herefordshire 17 Oxfordshire 16 Cumberland 16 Nottinghamshire 16 Leicestershire 15 Cambridgeshire 15 Surrey 14 Westmoreland II Sussex 10 Durham 8 Bedfordshire 8 Berkshire 8 Rutland 6 Middlesex . 5 32 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Huntingdonshire .... 5 Monmouth .... 3 The significance of these results is not quite obvious to casual inspection. We see that the origins of English ability are to be found all over the country, and we see also, as we should expect, that the large counties have produced much ability and the small counties little. How can we ascertain the real significance of these figures ? There are two methods we may adopt for ascertaining the significance of our figures : we may determine the amount of ability in each county in relation to its area, or we may determine it in relation to its population. The method of comparison which rests on ascer- taining the relative amount of ability per square mile for each county is not so absurd in the case of a country like England as it may possibly seem at the first glance. To compare the ability per square mile of a county like present-day Lancashire, covered with great towns, to an agri- cultural county like present-day Norfolk or Suffolk, would be obviously unfair to the latter. But we may remember that East Anglia was a populous manufacturing centre for many centuries during which Lancashire resembled modern Cum- berland. During the long history of England NATIONALITY AND RACE. 33 the various counties have passed through many economic vicissitudes, and while some have doubtless succeeded in remaining throughout at a fairly medium level of populousness, others have at some periods been great centres of population, and at other periods denuded of their inhabitants.* Thus when we put one period against another the differences between the counties in average density of population are probably small, and it is by no means so absurd to ascertain the relative amount of ability per square mile for the whole period as it would be for a single century. An even approximate determination of the amount of ability in relation to the population is obviously impossible for the whole period ; we can only obtain it with certainty for the nineteenth century. I have thought it of some interest, and probably of real signifi- cance as an aid to determining the problem before us, to consider separately the eminent persons born during the nineteenth century (nearly all in the first half), and to determine what relation the elements they supply us with bear to the population of the various counties as * The Poll-tax returns for the 14th century (as reproduced, e.g., by Edgar Powell, The Rising in East Anglia in 1381, Appendix I., pp. 120 et seq^) seem to indicate that, absolutely, Yorks, Norfolk, Suffolk, Somerset and Lincoln were at that time the most populous counties. 3 34 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. revealed by the census of 1841,* The basis of comparison seems here to be fairly sound, though unfortunately the numbers for each county are necessarily so small that we cannot consider the results as absolutely conclusive when they are not otherwise confirmed. It must be added, further, that there is another source of error the existence of which probably might not be suspected. Apart altogether from its rise and fall in population a county may still exhibit a very marked fluctuation in its genius- producing power. A very interesting and decisive example of this is furnished by Kent. On account of its proximity to the continent Kent has from the earliest periods been a highly civilised county, and it has always been a populous one ; it re- mains a populous and flourishing county at the present day. It has also been, as we shall see, very proUfic indeed in genius. Yet at the present day its ability-producing powers have almost ceased. It is associated, perhaps more than any other county, with the Renaissance in England ; Caxton belonged to Kent ; it was the home of Marlowe and Lyly, the two teachers of Shake- speare, as well as of Linacre and Harvey, who represent the English Renaissance on the scientific * I selected this census as it was convenient to use Fletcher's statistical analysis of its results. NATIONALITY AND RACE, 35 side ; at that period it was prolific in adminis- trators, diplomatists, and soldiers. It was strongly Royalist, and suffered greatly in the cause of Charles I. When Charles fell, Kent fell so far as genius-producing power is concerned,* and how- ever it may continue to flourish in population and general prosperity, it has never regained its power to add largely to English ability. In the six- teenth and seventeenth centuries its contribu- tions to the elements of English ability are repre- sented by the figures 15 and 16 respectively — relatively a very large proportion — but in the eighteenth century, so fertile in ability, Kent is only responsible for the relatively small contribu- tion of eleven elements, and in the nineteenth century its contribution has sunk to four elements, which do not include a single individual who was wholly Kentish. Yet, as we shall see, Kent stands almost, if not quite, at the head of all the English counties in its total contribution to English genius. Although no other county could be found to furnish so remarkable an instance of great intellectual fertility followed by intellectual decadence, without decrease in population and • It cannot be said that this coincidence adequately explains the pheno- menon. Dr. Beddoe suggests to me that the decline of Kent may be largely due to the attraction of London draining away its best stocks, and that we may thus account for the fact that Surrey, Essesi, and even Suffolk, stand lower in genius-producing power for the nineteenth century than for the whole period. 3* 36 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. prosperity, this case is enough to show that we can by no means assume that the intellectual fertility of a county in one century is any certain index to its general intellectual fertility. I now present, side by side, the order of de- creasing intellectual fertility into which fall the counties our eminent men belong to when we consider the relative amount of the total ability for the whole period on the basis of area (taken as per i,ooo square miles), and also the order into which the elements for the nineteenth cen- tury fall on the basis of the population of the counties in 1841. A plus sign after the figures in the first column indicates that as the modern population of the county in question is very decidedly below the average for the country generally, we probably ought to add a few units to the figures given ; a minus sign indicates that as the modern population is much above the average for the country generally, we probably ought to subtract a few units to reach a fair estimate ; the sign of equality means that the population of the county approximates to the average for the country generally. Those coun- ties which contain a proportion of elements of genius equal to more than 19 to the 1,000 square miles, or more than 2 per 100,000 inhabitants, must be considered prolific in genius. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 37 Amount of ability in ratio per 1,000 square miles. Amount of ability during nineteenth century in ratio per 100,000 inhabitants (1841). Rutland 40+ Norfolk . 5-3 Suffolk 33+ Herefordshire 4-3 Kent . 32 — Oxfordshire 4-3 Norfolk . 31 + Hertfordshire 3-8 Warwickshire 29- Worcestershire 3-8 Hertfordshire 28+ Westmoreland 3-6 Worcestershire 27- Dorsetshire 3-4 Buckinghamshire 25 + Cumberland 3-4 Cornwall 22+ Warwickshire 2.7 Gloucestershire 22 = Cornwall . 2.6 T,ancashire . 22 — Buckinghamshire 2-5 Devonshire . 21 + Shropshire . 2-S Oxfordshire 21 + Northumberland 2.4 Herefordshire 20+ Wiltshire . 2-3 Staffordshire 20 — Cambridgeshire 2-3 Nottinghamshire 19+ Lincolnshire 2.2 Dorsetshire . 19+ Suffolk 2.1 Northamptonshire : 18+ Nottinghamshire 2.0 Leicestershire 18+ Berkshire . 1.8 Somerset 18+ Devonshire. 1-5 Shropshire . 18+ Yorkshire . i-S Cambridgeshire 18+ Derbyshire . 1-4 Derbyshire . 18 = Cheshire 1.2 Surrey 18 — Gloucestershire 1.2 Cheshire. . 18- Hampshire I.I Essex 17+ Leicestershire •9 Wiltshire . 17+ Somerset . •9 Bedfordshire 17+ T,ancashire . .8 Middlesex . 17 Staffordshire .8 Westmoreland . 14+ Essex .8 Yorkshire . 14= Kent •7 38 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Amount of ability in ratio per 1,000 square miles. Amount of ability during nineteenth century in ratio per 100,000 inhabitants (1841). Huntingdonshire 13+ Sussex , •4 Lincolnshire 13+ Surrey . •3 Berkshire . 11 + Durham . •3 Hampshire 11 + Bedfordshire Cumberland 10+ Northamptonshire Northumberland 9+ Huntingdonshire . Sussex 7+ Monmouth Durham 7- Rutland , Monmouth . 5+ Middlesex, omitted* If we consider the eminent women separately we find that eleven English counties have pro- duced more than one unit of ability. The abso- lute numbers are as follow : — Norfolk .... 9 Suffolk .... 5 Yorkshire .... 4 Hereford .... 3 Kent 3 Northumberland . 3 Lancashire . . . . . 2 Worcestershire . . . . 2 Shropshire .... 2 Devonshire .... 2 Cornwall 2 * There are three units to Middlesex, but not having the population for Middlesex in 1841, excluding the metropolis, I have not included this county. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 39 The numbers are too small to make it worth while to attempt to ascertain the relative value of these j&gures. It is sufl&ciently clear that Norfolk stands first and that Suffolk, a much smaller county, follows very closely after.* Although the estimate of ability on the basis of the area of the counties is obviously only roughly approximate, while the more reliable method of ascertaining the proportion to population during the nineteenth century suffers from the defect that it by no means necessarily indicates the amount of abihty in previous centuries, and while both methods are hampered by the very small size of many of the counties, we may still reach certain conclusions by considering the two lists together. The counties that stand high on both hsts have probably been highly productive of intellectual abihty ; those that stand low in both hsts have probably been markedly unproductive. We may probably beheve that the counties that have con- tributed most largely to the making of English men of genius are Norfolk, Suffolk, Hertford- shire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, feuckinghamshire, Cornwall, Dorsetshire, Ox- fordshire, and Shropshire. To these we must * Conan Doyle in his analysis of Men of the Time found that " Sufifolk appears to be pre-eminently the county of famous women." I believe that this result is quite correct when we adopt a somewhat lower standard of ability than I have here adopted. 40 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. certainly add Kent, since its total output more than compensates for its intellectual decadence during recent centuries ; but we are perhaps scarcely justified in including Rutland, which by a curious anomaly appears at the head of the first Hst, though the smallest and one of the most thinly populated of Enghsh counties. It cannot hastily be assumed that, while these counties rank probably at the head of English counties from the intellectual point of view, there are not others which perhaps on a perfectly sound basis ought not to rank almost on a level with them. This would especially be so if we were to take quality of genius as well as quantity into consideration. It is probable that Somer- set, Devonshire, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Essex should be included among those of the first rank, although the two associated East Anghan counties of Norfolk and Suffolk have a fairly assured position at the head. It will be noted that the results here reached in regard to the distribution of ability amongst the English counties involve a very high, if not indeed the highest, place for Suffolk. Possibly the reader may be inclined to view this conclusion with suspicion should he chance to learn that the present writer, though having no personal connection with this county, happens to have been ancestrally connected with Suffolk during many centuries. Personally, I hope, I have no S37mpathy NATIONALITY AND RACE. 41 with the bias of patriotism, for I recognise that (however useful sometimes in practical affairs) it is an unfailing sign of intellectual iU-breeding ; but there is always a temptation to view with suspicion (which is often indeed justified) any investigation of the present kind as probably affected by local patriotism. It may therefore be proper to assist the reader to reach a personal equation in this case by stating that the present writer was born in Surrey and that his heredity may be expressed in the formula : Suffolk-Hampshire : Durham-Suffolk. It may be added that while I had not anticipated the high place which Suffolk would take as a contributor to British abiUty, that position is to some extent supported by the results of other im- partial inquiries. Thus Mr. Maclean finds that Suffolk is among the six English counties which on the basis of population contributed the largest number of eminent men to the Victorian period, and places Ipswich first among the towns (excluding the large cities) which have been prolific in ability. Sir Conan Doyle, investigating Men of the Time, finds that Suffolk is among the three English counties that stand first in production of intellectual abUity on the basis of population, and remarks that its intellectual productivity is " quite phenomenal." It must be rememberd that these inquiries were on the basis of birthplace, and that as East Anglians show a marked tendency to emigrate westwards, and especi- ally to London, in a large number of cases they are credited to other districts. On the basis of these results, and taking into consideration also the special quaUty of the indi- 42 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. viduals (as may be done by studying Appendix B), we come, I believe^ to the conclusion that there are two, or, rather, three, great foci of intellectual ability in England : the East Anghan focus, the south-western focus, and the focus of the Welsh Border. The East Anglian focus may for the present purpose be said to include not only Norfolk and Suffolk, but also the adjoining counties of Essex, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire, which, though inferior both in the quantity and the quality of their genius to East Anglia proper, are still high in intellectual ability which is nearly always of distinctively East Anglian type ; these five counties form a compact whole. Among the eminent men who, so far as our knowledge, some- times limited, extends, belong wholly to this region are Bishop Andrewes, the Bacons, Thomas Cavendish, Chaucer (?), Constable, Cotman, Cowper, Cranmer, Flaxman, John Fletcher, Gainsborough, William Gilbert, Grosseteste, the Lyttons, Nelson, the Newmans, Porson, Pusey, Ray, the Veres, Robert Walpole and Wolsey. Among those who belong in part to this region are Airy, the Arnolds, Barrow, Bradlaugh, Colet, Gresham, Stephen Hales, Charles Lamb, the Martineaus, Sir Thomas More, Pater, Sir Thomas Smith and Walsingham. Ethnologically, it may NATIONALITY AND fRACE. 43 be remarked^ this focus is the most recent of the three. East Angha is a region very open to invasion ; Brythons, Romans, Angles, and Nor- mans all seem to have come here in large numbers ; and it differs from every other English district (except to some extent Kent, a county closely aUied to it) in continuing to welcome foreigners — Dutch, Flemish, Walloon, French — all through mediaeval times, down to the revoca- tion of the Edict of Nantes* at the end of the seventeenth century. Middlesex with London lies on the borders of the East AngUan focus, with which, probably, of all the foci of EngUsh genius it is most intimately connected. It can scarcely, however, be included within that focus. The MetropoHs itself is ex- cluded from our enquiry, partly because we are not taking the accident of birth-place into account, and partly because it seems impossible to find £iny eminent person who belongs to London, or even to Middlesex, through all his grandparents. Middlesex is poor in aboriginal ability, even for a small county, and if we were to class it psychologically at all I believe it would fall in with the predominantly Saxon group of counties which includes Berkshire, Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire— a group which. 44 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. as we shall see, constitute a district remarkably poor in aboriginal ability. The marked prevalence of merely native ability in London, and the marked deficiency of reaUy aboriginal ability, are phenomena alike easy of explanation . Among the crowds who drift into every great metropolis there are always many clever and ambitious people ; hence the number of able persons who are merely connected with a metropohs by the accident of birth. But a great metropolis swiftly kills those whom it attracts ; Cantlie (Degeneration amongst Londoners, 1885, p. 19) very properly defined a Londoner as one whose parents and grand-parents were bom and bred in London ; but during the four years in which he investigated this question he was unable to find a single Londoner in this true and definite sense, and even those who were Londoners back to the grandparents on one side only, were usually stunted or feeble, and unlikely to propagate. Dr. Harry Campbell {Causation of Disease, p. 245) among 200 London-born children found two or three whose parents and grandparents were born and bred in London, and these children were very delicate. The south-western focus of English genius is the largest, and although in proportion to the population abihty k here less prevalent than in the East Anglian district, in absolute amount, and perhaps even in importance, this region may perhaps be said to be the most conspicuous centre of EngKsh intellectual energy. I regard it as comprising the counties of Wiltshire, NATIONALITY AND RACE. 45 Somerset, Dorset, Devon, and Cornwall. These counties, together with part of Hampshire, make up the whole of the south-western pro- montory of Great Britain. The population of this region is marked by very much darker hair, and therefore a much higher index of nigrescence, than the population of the counties to east of it. The district is defended by Wansdyke and Bokerley Dyke, one of the most important struc- tures of this kind in Europe, and this fact indi- cates that the region was once arrayed against the rest of Britain. Pitt-Rivers* has shown that this wall is of Roman or post- Roman date, possibly Saxon. This great focus of British genius is, taken altogether, unquestionably the oldest of the three foci which we may detect in England. We may call it the Goidelic-Iberian centre. It is well known that this region was the last stronghold of the early British power in England ; when, finally, its power was broken in war the Saxon invaders had become Chris- tianised and settled peacefully side by side with the aboriginal inhabitants. The people of this region were still described by King Alfred as " Welsh Kin," and the predominance of the aboriginal element may still be detected in the characteristics of the genius of this region. * Excavations in Cranbome Chase, Vol. 3. 46 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Among the more eminent individuals who seem to belong wholly to this region are Roger Bacon, Blackstone, Robert Blake, St. Boniface, Clifford, Coleridge, Dampier, Drake, St. Dunstan, Ford, Grocyn, Hawkins, Hobbes, Hooker, John of Salisbury, Keats, Locke, Pym, Raleigh, Reynolds, Rodney, Alfred Stevens, Sydenham, Trevithick, Thomas Young. Among those who belong to it in part are Matthew Arnold, Bradley, Browning, Byron, the Cannings, Fielding, C. J. Fox, Froude, the Kingsleys, Huxley. The third focus, that of the Welsh border, includes the counties of Gloucestershire, War- wickshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shrop- shire, and Cheshire. This selection of counties may possibly seem a little arbitrary, but it will be found not to be so on turning to the anthropo- logical map of the British Islands (as given, for instance, in Ripley's Races of Europe), founded on Beddoe's observations of the index of ni- grescence. These six counties form a dark- haired borderland in western England against Wales, and the eastern infolding to Warwickshire cannot be disregarded.* Monmouth is properly * There is a curious and compact island of very dark-haired peoples in the counties to the north of London, possibly connected with the Warwick infolding of the Welsh Border, but any psychological affinity of the inhabi- tants of these counties with those of the Welsh Border does not seem to be clear, though it is possible. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 47 excluded ; its contribution to English genius is extremely minute ; it was not even nominally English until the time of Henry VIII. ; it still remains anthropologically Welsh, and the study of its surnames shows, as Guppy states in his Homes of Family Names, that it is even more Welsh than Wales. The counties here included in the Welsh Border are aU much more thoroughly Anglicised, but Welsh was spoken in most of them until comparatively recent times, even in Glouces- tershire, undoubtedly a very mixed county.* The language of Shropshire has been described as "English spoken as a foreign language." In Herefordshire Welsh appears to be not quite ex- tinct even yet.f The whole of the district repre- sents the mingling on the one side of Welsh ele- ments, on the other of Saxon and Anglian elements. It is not difficult to account for this mingling ; when in the eighth century Offa extended the hmits of Mercia westwards, chang- ing the name of the British town of Pengwyrn to Shrewsbury, he adopted the policy of leaving on the land all the Britons who wished to remain ; * "The Transsabrina is very 'aboriginal ' and dark-haired," remarks Dr. Beddoe ; "the Cotswolds are largely Saxon and fair ; the Vale lies between in race as in position." t Rhys and Brynmor- Jones, TAe Welsh People, p. 526 '• cf. Southall, Wales and Her Language, especially ch. ix. dealing with traces of Welsh in the Marches. 48 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. in more recent times there has been a Welsh reflux eastwards, and the result is a fairly thorough assimilation of Welsh and English racial elements. The Welsh elements we must certainly regard as predominantly Brythonic rather than Goidelic, the latter people being mainly confined to the north-west and south- west districts of Wales. It may therefore be said that this Anglo-Brythonic district of the Welsh Border is intermediate in age between the recent East Anglian focus and the ancient south- western focus.* Among the more eminent individuals who belong wholly to the Welsh Border are Alexander of Hales, Samuel Butler, Warren Hastings, Sir Thomas Lawrence, Shakespeare, Purcell, William Tynda-e and Wycherley. Among those who be- long to it in part are Robert Boyle, John Bright, Sir Thomas Browne, Clive, Charles Darwin, Fielding, Keble, the Herberts, the Kembles, Landor, Macaulay, Map, William Morris, the Penns, Wedgwood, the Wesleys, Wren, Wycherley. It will be noted that all three of the great foci of English intellect belong mainly to the southern half of the country, the most anciently civilised * It is well recognised that the Goidels, the earlier Celtic invaders of Britain, ultimately mingled with the dark Iberian aboriginals, so losing the character- istic Celtic fairness. The Belgic invaders, the Brythonic Celts, came later and are nearly always found eastward of the Goidelic-Iberian populations. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 49 part, although within recent centuries the least prosperous and the most thinly populated. It must be added that nearly the whole of the northern part of England from Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, through York- shire well on into the Lowlands of Scotland, con- stitutes a large region which, although its intel- lectual elements are of no great density, presents its own peculiar anthropological characters. It is the predominantly Anglo-Danish part of England, containing the fairest population of the country.* Its intellectual fertility is greatest in its northern portions, which now form part of Scotland, and at its southern border, where it blends with East Anglia. To this last district belongs Sir Isaac Newton, the supreme represen- tative of Anglo-Danish genius, f • Leicestershire should doubtless be included in the Anglo-Danish district.* On the basis of place names Taylor finds it to be the most Danish county in England. Beddoe's map of the index of nigrescence, however, shows it to be ethnologically darker than the Anglo-Danish district proper. Psychologi- cally its genius seems to me rather mixed but certainly in large measure Anglo-Danish. t I was formerly inclined to think that Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire should be affiliated to the East Anglian focus, but a more careful considera- tion of the facts leads to the conclusion that, on the whole, both anthropolo- gically and psychologically they belong to the Anglo-Danish district. I still think that the northern portion of Northamptonshire, and still more emphati- cally Rutland, are mainly East Anglian in the character of their genius. The former county, however, seems to present a very special and vigorous mixture of East Anglian, Anglo-Danish and aboriginal elements. It is not easy to fix the exact western limits of the East Anglian district unless we boldly carry it as far as the Welsh Border counties, Warwickshire and Gloucestershire. 4 so A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Apart from exact science and from scholarship, the Anglo-Danish district, in proportion to its size, has not produced many men in purely intel- lectual fields. Its children have usually been more remarkable for force of character than for force of intellect. Their stubborn independent temper involves an aptitude for martyrdom ; many religious martyrs come from this region, and the martyrologist Foxe also. East Angha is pro- ductive of great statesmen and great ecclesiastics ; it is also a land of great scholars. At the same time nearly half the British musical composers and more than a third of the painters have come from this same region. It has no aptitude for abstract thinking, for metaphysics, but in con- crete thinking, in the art of treating science philosophically, it is easily supreme. Its special characters seem to be its humanity, its patience, its grasp of detail, its deliberate flexibility, com- bined with a profound love of hberty and inde- pendence.* The characteristic English love of compromise is rooted in East Anglia. So typi- cally English a statesman as Walpole, with his sound instincts in practical affairs, belonged to • It may be noted that the founders of New England, both on the political and the religious side, were largely produced by East Anglia. The Washingtons came from the related county of Northamptonshire ; the Emersons were from Suffolk ; Winthrop, who, it has been said, more than any other man moulded Massachusetts, which moulded New England, belonged to Central Suflfolk. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 51 Norfolk, and Wolsey belonged to Suffolk. In spite, however, of the marked sanity and self- possession of the East Anglian, it may be added that while East Anglia has produced many of the best EngUshmen it has also produced a con- siderable proportion of the worst.* Those who figure in English history chiefly by virtue of their villainy do not appear in my list, but it is notable that many of the great men who have come down to us with a somewhat flawed reputation belong here ; Bacon is a typical example of the first rank. When we turn to the south-western focus of EngUsh genius we find ourselves among people of different mental texture, but of equal mental distinction. In positive intellectual achievement they compare with the slow and patient people of East Anglia, while as briUiant personaUties they are in the very first rank. They are sailors rather than scholars, and courtiers, perhaps, rather than statesmen ; they are innovators, daring free-thinkers, pioneers in the physical and intellectual worlds. Raleigh, on both sides a Devonshire man, is the complete type of these people. They are, above all, impressive persona- * It must be added, at the same time, that the records of criminality, at all events during the nineteenth century, by no means show the East Anglian counties among the worst. 52 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. lities, aggressive, accomplished, irresistible, break- ing rather than bending, without the careful foresight of the laborious and self-distrustful people of the east coast. This district alone has furnished a third of the great sailors of Britain, and the most brilliant group, with Drake and Hawkins and Gilbert as well as Raleigh. The expansive Elizabethan age gave the men of these parts their supreme chance, and they availed themselves of it to the utmost. Great Britain's most eminent soldiers have not usually been English, but one of the most famous of all, Marlborough, belongs to this region. In the arts of peace this south-western focus shows especially well in painting. It cannot, indeed, be compared to the East Anghan focus in this respect, but Reynolds belongs to Devon, and is a typical representative of the quaUties of this region on the less aggressive side, just as Raleigh is on the more militant side, both alike charming and accomplished personalities. Both in the material and spiritual worlds there is an imagina- tive exaltation, an element of dash and daring, in the men of this south-western district, which seems to carry them through safely. The south- western focus is not quite so homogeneous as the eastern group. Somerset, which is the centre of the focus, seems to me to present its real and NATIONALITY AND RACE. 53 characteristic kernel, especially on the purely intellectual side. We do not find here the dash- ing recklessness, the somewhat piratical ten- dency, nor quite the same brilliant personal quahties as at the western part of the peninsula. The Somerset group of men are superficially more hke those of East Angha, but in reality with a very distinct physiognomy of their own. Like the rest of this region, Somerset is a land of great sailors, but the typical sailor hero of Somerset is Blake, and the difference between Blake and Raleigh is significant of the difference between the men of Somerset and the men of Devon. Somerset has produced the philosophers of this region, Roger Bacon, Hobbes, Locke ; and in more recent days Bagehot and Huxley have been typical thinkers of the group. Hooker, the " judicious," is among the men of Devon. They are not often scholars (notwithstanding the pre- sence of the " ever-memorable " Hales), being prone to rely much on their own native qualities, One recalls the remark of Hobbes, when charged with an indifference to books : " If I read as much as other people I should know as httle as other people." While less concrete than the East Anghans, these eminent thinkers have not the abstract metaphysical tendencies of the North British philosophers ; they reveal a certain 54 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. practical sagacity, a determination to see things clearly, a hatred of cant and shams, a " positive " tendency, which is one of the notes of purely English thought and may be said to have its headquarters here. The representative scientific man of this region is the brilliant and versatile Thomas Young, whose luminous intelli- gence and marvellous intuition render him a typical example of genius in its purest form. It is easy to define the nature of the genius of the Welsh Border. It is artistic in the widest sense, and notably poetic ; there is a tendency to literary and oratorical eloquence, frequently tinged with religious or moral emotion, and among those who belong entirely to this district there are no scientific men of the first order. This region has the honour of claiming Shake- speare ; and it may be pointed out that it is difficult to account for Shakespeare without assuming in him the presence of a large though not predominant Celtic element. Landor, one of the greatest of English masters of prose, comes in part within the Welsh Border, as does Fielding, while Purcell, the greatest of Enghsh musical composers, also probably belongs to this district. Sir Thomas Browne, though only a Welsh Bor- derer on his father's side, is very t5^pical, and Macaulay is characteristic of the Celt as historian. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 55 The presence of Mrs. Siddons, although the genius of the Kemble family is attributed mainly to their Irish mother, helps to indicate the characteristics of this region, which although it has produced fewer great personalities than the two main foci of English genius, has certainly had its full share in some of the very greatest. The part of the Welsh Border in Darwin was small, but though he was more characteristically a son of the Anglo-Danish and East Anglian regions, it was probably not without its influence. It has already been made clear that the county of Kent constitutes a remarkable, though small, centre of English genius. I was formerly inchned to regard this very interesting district as depen- dent on the important East Anglian focus. I am convinced, however, that this is a mistake. If we carefully contemplate the eminent persons produced by Kent it will be seen that they can be more easily affiliated, on the whole, to the south-western than to the East Anghan focus. Harvey, for instance, the greatest of the Kentish men, resembled the south-western people as much in intellectual temperament, as, by his short stature, dark hair and eyes, choleric constitution, he resembled them anthropologically. This seem- ing affinity of the genius of Kent to that of the south-western promontory, though it cannot be 56 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. said to be complete identity, may pethaps be regarded as one of the numerous facts which tend to invalidate the belief, widely prevalent a few years ago under the influence of several eminent historians and ultimately resting on some rhetorical expressions of Gildas,* that the Romano-British inhabitants of Kent were entirely exterminated by the Teutonic invaders. Undoubtedly, however, the Teutonic element is considerable in all this south-eastern part of England, as far westwards as Wilts. One is indeed tempted to ask whether it may serve to explain another psychological phenomenon which is revealed by the distribution of English genius. The Jutes came to Kent ; the Saxons occupied the regions to the west of Kent. This district, including (with Kent and Essex) the whole of the light-haired populations of southern England, is occupied by the counties of Sussex, Surrey, Hampshire and Berkshire. Except in so far as Surrey is suburban to London and profits by this proximity, all this region is comparatively bare of aboriginal genius. Mackintosh observed, in his notable study of the psychic characteristics of British peoples, that the unmixed Enghsh * Professor H. Williams, in his recent edition of Gildas (Cymmrodorion Record Soc. 1899, Part I.), points out that Gildas is not a historian, but a preacher of righteousness who is simply seeking to show how divine anger visits sin. Beddoe finds early elements persisting in the Kentish population. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 57 Saxon, unlike the Angle (and possibly unlike the Jute), is marked by mental mediocrity. One is tempted to ask whether this fact, if it is a fact, may be invoked to explain the result of the present inquiry as regards this region. I do not propose to consider in detail the dis- tribution of abihty in the other parts of the British Islands, for the figures are here too small to 3deld reliable results. The distribution of abihty in Wales, Scotland and Ireland is, how- ever, so definitely confined to certain districts that a mere inspection of the crude figures suffices to give us for each of these countries a fairly close conception of their intellectual geography. In the case of Wales the elements of abihty are distributed as follows : Glamorganshire Denbighshire Montgomeryshire Radnorshire . Fhntshire Carnarvonshire Anglesey Cardiganshire Pembrokeshire Merionethshire Caermarthenshire 7 7 6 6 3 3 3 I I I 58 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. It is not difficult to understand why a large, fertile and populous district like Glamorganshire — even leaving out of account its commercial and mining activities — should stand high in actual numbers, although it stands lower in proportion to area and very low in relation to population. It is more remarkable that Caermarthenshire, the largest Welsh county, should show no trace- able elements of genius. The really productive intellectual region of Wales is comprised in Den- bighshire, Montgomeryshire and Radnorshire. This is a fact of some interest when we recall the ethnological history of this region. Wales is a Goidehc country (that is to say, a country in- habited by the earlier Celts mingled with abori- gines), which appears to have been subsequently invaded by the Brythonic Ordovices ; these formed a wedge in the country reaching to Cardigan Bay, leaving the Goidels m the north-western district and (as we may still observe in the map founded on the index of nigrescence) in the south-western district. But later still — probably soon after the departure of the Romans — a very vigorous stock led by Cuneda and speaking a tongue very closely allied to GauUsh, came from what is now the south of Scotland, and established themselves in the centre of the Ordovician region, where their leaders became the acknowledged ancestors of NATIONALITY AND RACE. 59 the Gw5med Kings and the best known Welsh saints.* Their land comprised Radnorshire^ Mont- gomeryshire and the south-west of Denbighshire, which is precisely the land which we have found to be the focus of Welsh genius. It is very diffi- cult not to see here one at least, and perhaps the chief, of the factors which have caused this com- paratively unimportant and thinly peopled region to be so productive in abiUty. In accordance with the comparative poverty of Wales in intellectual achievements during the earlier periods of subjection to England is the statement of Rhys and Brynmor-Jones (The Welsh People, p. 471) that " from the people as a whole hardly a voice comes during the centurie? from the Norman Conquest to the middle of the eighteenth century. They tilled their land, attended to their flocks and their herds, married and died in com- plete obscurity, without being in any great degree touched by the intellectual movements of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries." These authors have ably expounded the causes of the intellectual decadence of Wales during this long period. The absolute figures of the ancestral elements of ability in Scotland are as foUows : — Midlothian 28 Aberdeenshire .... 26 Ayrshire 21 Lanarkshire 21 * J. Rhys and D. Brynmor-Jones, The Welsh People, 1900, p. 21. 6o A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Fife 15 Dumfriesshire 14 Forfarshire .... 12 Perthshire .... 9 Haddingtonshire . 9 Ross-shire and Cromartyshire 8 Berwickshire 8 Stirlingshire .... 6 Argyleshire .... 5 Elginshire .... 4 Roxburghshire 4 Renfrewshire 4 Dumbartonshire . 3 Sutherland .... 2 Orkney and Shetland . 2 Kincardineshire . 2 Inverness-shire 2 Nairnshire .... 2 Clackmannanshire 2 Selkirkshire . . . . 2 Wigtonshire . . . . 2 Banffshire 2 Kinross-shire . . . . I Buteshire .... I Caithness I Linlithgowshire . . . , I Peeblesshire . . . . Kirkcudbrightshire NATIONALITY AND RACE. 6i It will be seen that the genius of Scotlaijd has been mainly produced by the tract between the Cheviots and the Grampians. While, however, the whole of this district is proUfiic in abiUty, a narrow central belt has proved pre-eminently able to breed men of intellect. This belt runs from Aberdeen in a south-westerly direction through Forfar, Fife, Midlothian, with the sur- rounding district, and Lanark (including Glas- gow) ; on reaching Ayr and Dumfriess it widens out, not extending beyond the Enghsh border westward into Galloway. Aberdeen and Edin- burgh have always been the two great centres of Scotch genius. If, however, we were to take into consideration the proportions of genius according to area and population of the various counties this geographical distribution would appear less decisively marked. The upland coun- ties, whether in or out of the Highlands proper, appear poor in genius and the Lowland counties rich. But it must be remembered that the upland coimties are also poor in population and the low- land counties rich. So far as a rough comparison of the total amount of genius with the recent population can be considered as any indication of the true distribution of genius in Scotland it would appear that both Aberdeen and Edinburgh reaUy are very prolific in ability, and that Ayr, 62 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Fife, and even Sutherland are little, if at all, inferior in intellectual fertility, while Hadding- tonshire, Berwickshire, and Dumfriesshire would appear to stand probably at the head. It would seem that even on a population basis the dark- haired populations show a somewhat less intel- lectual fertility than the fair-haired populations. This question is obviously complicated by the language question, but it is noteworthy that Sutherland, which is as fair-haired in population as any part of Scotland, would appear to show a fairly high proportion of ability relatively to its population, while Inverness, which is the darkest part of Scotland, stands very low, and Galloway, which is a very dark region, stands very much lower than the border counties, which are very fair. If this tendency prevails in Scot- land it is the reverse of the tendency which prevails in England (though not in Wales), where the darker-haired districts seem on the whole to be more prolific in ability than the fair-haired regions. Another point about the distribution of genius in Scotland which may be noted is that the quantity and quality of its ability tend to go together. Knox, Burns and Scott, the three most famous Scotchmen — it is unnecessary to say the greatest — all belonged to counties which would appear to be among the most prolific in ability. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 63 Turning to Ireland, we find that, as in Scotland, certain regions appear to be rich in genius, others poor, or even absolutely bare. The distribu- is as lollows : — DubUn 15 Cork 10 Antrim 9 Down 8 Waterford . 6 Londondeiry Kilkenny Qare . 6 5 4 Westmeath 4 Tyrone Wexford 4 3 Limerick 3 Kildare 2 Tipperary . Kerry Galway Mayo Donegal Armagh Cavan 2 2 2 2 2 2 I Carlow I Wicklow I Queen's County I 64 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Longford . . . . . i Meath, Louth, King's County, Sligo, Roscommon, Leitrim, Fermanagh, Monaghan . . o The predominance of Dubhn in Ireland, it will be seen, is more decisive than is that of Midlo- thian in Scotland ; it is, however, possible that this is due to a greater ignorance of the ancestry of eminent Irishmen. In any case, however, it wiU be observed that the region of Ireland chiefly productive in ability is Leinster with the adjoining portion of Munster, and, closely following it, Ulster. Both these districts — for we may con- sider them as separate though they adjoin, as they are anthropologically distinct, the people of Ulster being much darker — have long been racially mixed. In the first district Goidels and Brythons were both numerous, and various minor foreign immigrations have taken place here since ; in comparatively recent times it was chiefly in Waterford and DubHn that the French Hugue- nots of Ireland settled. Ulster, as is well known, received a large infusion of Enghsh and Scotch blood in the seventeenth century, and this ad- mixture has very largely affected the character of the ability it has produced. It is, however, a mistake to suppose that the temperamental, NATIONALITY AND RACE. 65 sometimes rather aggressive, energy of Ulster- men is due solely, or even perhaps mainly, to English and Scotch admixtures, influential as these have been. " There is neither in Alban nor in Ireland," we read in Lady Gregory's recension of the great Irish saga, " an army that can put down the men of Ulster when once their weakness is gone and their anger is kindled." * Giraldus Cambrensis also bears testimony to the vigour of the aboriginal Ulsterman. The " Saxon " outsider is sometimes tempted to think that in many respects the modern men of Ulster are more Irish than the Irish themselves, and such an opinion finds support in the fact that, as measured by the index of nigrescence, Ulster anthropologically approaches Connaught. There can be no doubt, however, that Enghsh and Scotch elements, however largely admixed with aboriginal elements, play a very large part indeed in the manifestations of Irish genius. It would be of some interest to classify our eminent persons into groups according to their activities and to note the district in which each group tends to predominate. Appendix B will enable the reader to examine into this matter for himself. As might be expected, politicians, divines, and men of letters abound in all parts * Ciuhulain of Muirthemne, p. 256. 5 66 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. of the kingdom. It is curious to note that great lawyers are also scattered over the whole kingdom with notable impartiality. While poets are to be found ever5rwhere, they are distinctly more predominant in the south of England, and to a less extent in Wales and the Welsh border counties ; but when we consider the origins of those English poets who are unanimously recog- nised to stand first, we find them scattered over the whole country as widely apart as possible, Chaucer probably in Suffolk, Spenser in Lanca- shire, Shakespeare in Warwickshire, Milton in Oxfordshire, Wordsworth in Yorkshire, Shelley in Sussex, Keats in Devon or Cornwall. In science Scotland stands very high, Ireland extremely low. The distribution of scientific men is as follows : Enghsh . 84 Welsh 2 Scotch 21 Irish I Scotch-English 7 Scotch-Irish 2 Enghsh-Irish I English-German . I Enghsh-Dutch J _ '_ T I In order to realise the extraordinary preponder- NATIONALITY AND RACE. 6y ance of the Scotch over the Irish contingent, it must be remembered that until the present century the population of Ireland has been much larger than that of Scotland, and it may be noted that the one purely Irish man of science (Tyndall) was of original English origin. If we proceed to consider the distribution of Enghsh men of science in the four distinct eth- nological regions to which reference has already been made, we find that six belong more or less to the East Anghan focus, five to the South- western focus, four to the Welsh Border region, and seven to the large Anglo-Danish district. It is of interest to compare these results with those obtained by Gallon in the case of his modern EngUsh men of science {English Men of Science, pp. i8, 21). He found that three-fourths were EngUsh. Of every ten, there were ; 5 Pure EngUsh. I Anglo-Welsh. I Anglo-Irish. I Scotch. I Included Anglo-Scotch, Scotch-Irish, pure Irish, Welsh, Manx and Channel Islands. I Unclassed, including mixture of English, French, German, Creole, Dutch, Swedish, etc. " On an analysis of the scientific status of the men on my Ust," he remarks, "it appeared to me that their 68 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. ability is higher in proportion to their numbers among those of pure race." This may be said to be in agreement with my results, which necessarily deal with men of a higher average order of ability, and which show a very much smaller propor- tion of individuals of mixed race, though in part this difference may be accounted for by the greater precision of Mr. Galton's information in relation to his cases. He further points out that the birthplace of his men of science is usually in towns, away from the coast, and he presents a geographical diagram which shows the distribution. This diagram is of interest, for it shows with great pre- cision the fallacy of birthplace as any true indication of the real distribution of abihty. Nearly the whole of both the East-AngUan and south-western foci of genius are in this diagram left bare of scientific ability. " The whole of the Eastern Counties," Mr. Galton remarks, " and the huge triangle at whose angles Hast- ings, Worcester, and Exeter, or rather Exmouth, are situ- ated, are very deficient in aboriginal science." That the deficiency is very far from being " aboriginal," becomes sufficiently clear when we are careful to ignore the accident of birthplace in determining the origins of men of science. Psychologically it is not difficult to detect a distinct character in English scientific genius, according as it springs from the Anglo-Danish district or the East Anglian focus or the south- western focus, although I am not aware that this has been pointed out before. The Anglo- Danish district may here be fairly put first, not NATIONALITY AND RACE. 69 only on account of the large number of scientific men it has wholly or in part produced, but also on account of the very high eminence of some among them. The Anglo-Dane appears to pos- sess an aptitude for mathematics which is not shared by the native of any other English dis- trict as a whole, and it is in the exact sciences that the Anglo-Dane triumphs.* Newton is the supreme figure of Anglo-Danish science ; it will be noted that he belongs to the East Anglian border, and by his mother is claimed by Rutland, a little county which, I am incUned to think, really belongs psychologically and perhaps ethno- logicaUy to East Anglia. The combination of the Anglo-Dane and the East Anglian seems highly favourable to scientific aptitude ; the ab- stracting tendency of the Anglo-Dane, and the exaggerated independence of his character, with the difficulty he finds in taking any other point of view than his own, are happily tempered by the more cautious and flexible mind of the East AngUan. Darwin (who also belonged to the Welsh Border) belonged in part, like Newton, to the East Anglian border of the Anglo-Danish dis- trict, and also (somewhat remotely) to Norfolk, a county which contains many Danish elements. * The mathematical tendencies of Cambridge are due to the fact that Cambridge drains the ability of neatly the whole Anglo-Danish district. 70 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. The science of the Anglo-Danish district is not exclusively mathematical, and geology especially owes much to the Anglo-Dane ; it will be remem- bered that geology was one of the first sciences to attract Darwir. The East Anglian is in scientific matters drawn to the concrete, and shows little or no mathe- matical aptitude. He is a natural historian in the widest sense. He delights in the patient collection of facts, and seeks to sift, describe, co-ordinate, and classify them. In his hands science becomes almost an art. Gilbert illus- trates East Anglian scientific methods in the inorganic world, Ray in the organic, and Francis Bacon, though he cannot himself be classed among men of science, has in the Novum Organum and elsewhere presented a picture of scientific method as it most naturally appears to the East Anglian mind. It is not easy to see anything specific or defi- nitely Brythonic in the scientific activities of the Welsh Border. At most it may be said that there is some tendency for science here to take on a technological character and to become associated with the artistic crafts. The scientific men found here often belong only in part to the district, and many of them seem to possess the psychological characters of the south-western focus. NATIONALITY AND RACE. 71 The scientific characters of the south-western focus are quite clear, and definitely distinct from those of either the Anglo-Danish district or the East Anglian focus. What we find here is the mechanical impulse, and more especially the physiological temper, the instinct to seek out the driving forces of vital phenomena. It is on this account that Harvey, though of Kentish family, may be said to belong psychologically to this focus, as also Stephen Hales, though he belonged partly to Kent and partly to East Angha. The great scientific physicians belong here (the surgeons are largely East Anglian), with Sydenham at the head and Ghsson. Huxley, again, is a typical figure. Inventors are numerous, for the scientific men of this region have fre- quently been enamoured of practical problems, and just as they have been pioneers in the physical world, so in science they have sought rather to make discoveries than to formulate laws. Thus in astronomy we have Adams, and one of the greatest and most typical scientific men of this region was Thomas Young. When we consider the distribution of great soldiers, we find the following results : — English 22 Welsh 3 72 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Irish 4 Scotch . i, .... 13 EngUsh-Scotch .... 4 English-Irish 2 Scotch-Irish 2 Within England seven belong to the Anglo-Danish district, six to the East Anglian focus, five to the south-western focus, and four to the Welsh Border. In England itself, it will be seen, miUtary genius is relatively less pronounced than in any other part of the British Islands, and what absolute numerical preponderance the English element possesses seems to be due exclusively to the earlier periods of English history ; the line of great English generals apparently ended with Marl- borough. The Scotch stand easily at the head ; the Irish would take a much higher place if we considered the nineteenth century separately. When, however, we turn to the distribution of great sailors, a very different result is shown, and the position of English ability is more than re- asserted. While England has produced as many as 29 great sailors, only two are Scotch, one English-Scotch, one English-Welsh and none Irish. Within England, eleven belong to the south-western focus, ten to the Anglo-Danish dis- trict and more especially to its southern border in NATIONALITY AND RACE. 73 Lincolnshire, four to the East Anglian focus and four to the Welsh Border. The distribution of artists (including sculptors and architects as well as painters) is as follows : English . Welsh . Scotch Irish Enghsh-Welsh EngUsh-Scotch Scotch-Irish English-French English-German English-Italian Enghsh- Russian 51 3 to 5 I 2 I 2 2 I I Within England we find that eighteen are scat- tered over the large Anglo-Danish district, more than a third of these, however, belonging to the small county of Nottinghamshire, twelve are East Anglian, eight belong to the south-west, six to the Welsh Border. The fertility of Nottinghamshire — a county not other- wise notably productive of genius — in artists is a pheno- menon of some interest in view of the fact that Notting- hamshire was a great art-centre in the fourteenth century, when its " alablasterers " sent re-tables, screens and 74 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. figure-panels to aU parts of Western Europe. (Archi- tectural Review, April, 1903, p. 143.) It would be idle to see here the influences of tradition ; we cannot suppose that there was any continuity of this kind between the fourteenth century alablasterers and nineteenth century painters, the possibility of such continuity having been absolutely destroyed by the Reformation. The reason- able supposition is that we see here a native bent to art showing itself at one time in one form, at another time in another form. I have elsewhere (Monthly Review, March, 1902) dis- cussed some interesting points in the distribution of British artists, and have shown how the painters of the east coast differ essentially from those of the west. A very definite case of special distribution of ability, differing markedly from the distribution of ability generally, is furnished by great actors and actresses. So far as it can be traced this distribution is as follows : — English • 23 Welsh I Irish 6 English-Welsh .... I English-Scotch. I English-Irish . . . . . 6 English-French I Irish-French I English-Irish-French-Swiss I Enghsh-Danish I NATIONALITY AND RACE. 75 It will be seen that the Scotch virtually do not appear at all, and that the relative preponderance of the Irish is enormous. Our knowledge of the ancestry of actors is peculiarly vague and uncer- tain, and it is highly probable that if our knowledge on this point were more precise the preponderance of the Irish element, at the expense of the English element, would be still greater. The distribution of actors within England, so far as we are able to trace it, further illustrates the poverty of the more specifically English districts in dramatic ability of a high order. Four of our great actors and actresses belong more or less to the south- western focus, four to the Welsh Border, three to the East Anglian focus, and only two to the whole Anglo-Danish district. I do not propose to discuss here the various causes which have led to the special distribution of genius in the British Islands, and to the variations in distribution shown by different kinds of genius. While many of the characters thus revealed are evidently due to racial characteristics, it would be rash to assume that they may all thus be accounted for. We have also to take into account environmental conditions. It is not easy to make an exact comparison on this basis before the nine- teenth century. The careful study of the condition of England made by Joseph Fletcher, secretary of the Statistical Society, on the basis of the census of 1841, conveniently enables us to make various comparisons for this period, and we may be fairly certain that the 76 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. conditions then prevailing had existed during a consider- ably earlier period. When, on this basis, we examine the various counties, there would appear to be a tendency to correlation between fertility in genius and (i) amount of real property per head of population ; (2) deficiency of persons of inde- pendent means ; (3) amount of ignorance (Norfolk is among the seven most ignorant counties, while Suffolk and Hertfordshire are also among the ignorant counties) ; (4) commitals for serious offences against the person (Norfolk is at this period the most criminal county in this respect, being in relation to population 80 per cent, above average, whUe Huntingdonshire, with little genius, has the least criminality, being 63 per cent, below aver- ^gs) ; (5) bastardy (the four counties with largest pro- portion of illegitimate children being Cumberland, Here- ford, Norfolk and Nottinghamshire). On the other hand there appears to be no tendency to correlation between fertility in genius and (i) offences against property (excluding the " maUcious " group which are included in offences against the person) ; (2) assaiilts ; (3) improvident marriages ; (4) pauperism ; (5) density of population ; (6) crime (general commit- ments) ; (7) amount of deposits in savings banks per head of population. While such comparisons are at various points of much interest and possibly of real significance, it must be remembered that though it is highly probable that there is a real connection between genius and the conditions prevailing in its environment, we must not here too hastily assume such a connection. It may be added that we should also have to take into consideration the conditions prevailing in the birthplaces of men of genius, which are not always the places of their origin. 77 III. SOCIAL CLASS. Status of parents of British men of genius — Upper Class — ^Yeomen and Farmers — Clergy — Medicine — Law — ^Army — Navy — Miscellaneous Profes- sions — Commercial Classes — Crafts — Artisans and Unskilled — The parentage of artists — The parentage of actors — How far change has taken place in the social composition of the genius-producing class — Comparison of the genius-producing classes with the ordinary population. In considering to what social classes the 1,030 eminent British men and women on our list belong, we naturally seek to ascertain the position of the fathers. In 201 cases it has not been easy to pronounce definitely on this point, and I have, therefore, omitted these cases as doubtful. The remainder may be classed with a fair degree of certainty. I find that they faU into the following groups : — Per cent. Upper classes (or " good family ") 154 18.5 Yeomen and farmers . . . 50 6 Church 139 16.7 Law 59 7.1 78 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Per cent. Army .... 35 4.2 Navy (and sea generally) . i6 1.9 Medicine .... • 30 3-6 Miscellaneous professions . 65 7.8 Of&cials, clerks, etc. . 27 3-2 Commercial . 156 18.8 Crafts .... 77 9.2 Artisans and imskilled 21 2-5 In some thirty cases the status of the father is entered under two heads, but, as a rule, it has seemed sufficient to state what may be presumed to be the father's chief occupation at the time when his eminent child was born. In the order in which I have placed the groups they may be said to constitute a kind of hierarchy. I place the yeomen and farmers immediately after the Upper Class group, although at one end this group includes the peasant-farmer.* Until recent years, the man who lived on the land which had belonged to his family for many cen- turies, occupied a position not essentially different from that of the more noble families with some- * The yeoman may be defined as an owner-cultivator ; the farmer may be only a tenant. The poet Crabbe in 1791 visited his Vfife's uncle, a Suffolk yeoman, called Tovell, to whom he refers as " the first-rate yeoftian of that period — the yeoman that already began to be styled by courtesy an esquire. Mr. Tovell might possess an estate of some eight hundred pounds per annum, a portion of which he himself cultivated." SOCIAL CLASS. 79 what larger estates around him. Even at the present day, in remote parts of the country, it is not difficult to meet men who live on the land on farms which have belonged to their ancestors through several centuries. Such aristocrats of the soil, thus belonging to " old families," frequently have all the characteristics of fine country gentle- men, and in former days the line of demarcation between them and the " upper class " must often have been difficult to draw. I have formed my " upper class " group in a somewhat exclusive spirit ; I have not included in it the very large body of eminent men who are said to belong to " old families " ; these I have mostly allowed to fall out as " doubtful," but there is good reason to believe that a considerable proportion really belong to the class of small country gentlemen on the borderland between the aristocracy in the narrow sense and the yeoman and farmer class. To this class, therefore, must be attributed a very important part in the production of the men who have furnished the characteristics of British Civi- lization. The same must be said of the clergy, whom I place next, because they are largely drawn from the same ranks and have on the whole led very similar lives. (With the clergy I have included thirty-two ministers of religion belonging to very 8o A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. various denominations.) The religious movements of the past century have altogether transformed the lives of the clergy, but until recent years the parson was usually simply a country gentleman or farmer somewhat better educated, and more in touch with intellectual tastes and pursuits. The proportion of distinguished men and women contri- buted from among the families of the clergy can only be described as enormous. In mere number the clergy can seldom have equalled the butchers or bakers in their parishes, yet only two butchers and four bakers are definitely ascertained to have pro- duced eminent children, as against 139 parsons. Even if we compare the Church with the other professions with which it is most usually classed, we find that the eminent children of the clergy considerably outnumber those of lawyers, doctors and army officers put together. This preponder- ance is the more remarkable when we remember that (although I have certainly included eminent illegitimate children of priests) it is only within the last three and a half centuries that the clergy have been free to compete in this field. It is of interest to note that genius is not the only form of mental anomaly which is produced more frequently by the clergy than by any other social class. The clerical profession, as Langdon Down pokited out many years ago, also produces more idiots than any other class. SOCIAL CLASS. 8i Law, Medicine, and the Army and Navy furnish contingents which, though very much smaller than that of the Church, are sufficiently important to be grouped separately, but all the remaining pro- fessions I have thrown into a single group. These are : Artists (painters, sculptors, engravers, archi- tects), ao ; Actors, etc., i6 ; Musicians, Com- posers, etc., 9 ; Men of Letters, 6 ; Schoolmasters, 7 ; Engineers, Surveyors and Accountants, 4 ; Men of Science, 3. Although so few of the fathers of eminent men can be described professionally as men of letters or men of science, it must be added that in a considerable number of cases literary or scientific aptitudes were present in the parents. We now reach a group of altogether different character. Trade. It is a group of great magni- tude, but its size is due to the inevitable inclusion of a very large number of avocations under a single heading. These avocations range from banking to inn-keeping. The bankers evidently form the aristocracy of the trading class, and a remarkable number, considering the smallness of the class (not less than 12), have been the fathers of eminent sons. Under the rather vague head- ing of " merchants " we find 25, and there are at least nine " manufacturers." Wine merchants, brewers, vintners, publicans and others connected 6 82 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. with the sale or production of alcoholic liquors have yielded as many as i6 distinguished sons, who have often attained a high degree of eminence, from Chaucer to Joule. Tea and coffee are only responsible for one each. There are eight drapers, mercers and hosiers, and six tailors and hatters ; grocers and a great number of other shop-keeping trades count at most three or four eminent men each. It is, perhaps, noteworthy that at least four Lord Mayors of London have been the fathers of distinguished sons ; only one of them (Gresham) attained fame in business, the others becoming men of letters and scholars. It must be added in regard to this group that in a certain number of cases the particular " trade " or " business " of the father is not specified. The group which I have denominated " Crafts " is closely related to that of " Trade," and in many cases it is difficult or impossible to decide whether an occupation should be entered under one or the other head. But, speaking generally, there is a very clear distinction between the two groups. For success in the essentially commercial avocations is involved, above all, financial ability ; the crafts are essentially manual, and success here involves more of the qualities of the artist than of the tradesman. Just as the banker is the typical representative of commercial trans- SOCIAL CLASS. 83 actions, so the carpenter stands at the head of the crafts. There seems to be something pecu- har in the Uf e or aptitudes of the carpenter especi- ally favourable to the production of intellectual children, for this association has occurred as many as thirteen times, while there are four builders. No other craft approaches the carpenter in this respect ; there are five shoemakers, five cloth- workers, five weavers (all belonging to the early phase of industrial development before factories), five goldsmiths and jewellers, four blacksmiths, while many other handicrafts are mentioned once or twice. Finally, we reach the group of parents engaged in some unskilled work, and, therefore, belonging to the lowest social class. It is the smallest of all the groups, and, though including some notable persons, it can scarcely be said to be a pre-eminently distinguished group. As many as eight of the parents were common soldiers, the rest mostly agricultural labourers. It may be interesting to inquire whether our eminent men, when grouped according to the station and avocation of their fathers, show any marked group-characters ; whether, in other words, the occupation of the father exercises an influence on the nature and direction of the intel- lectual aptitudes of the son. To some extent it "6* 84 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. does exercise such an influence. It is true that there are eminent men of very various kinds in all of these groups. But there is yet a clearly visible tendency for certain kinds of ability to fall into certain groups. It is not surprising that there should be a tendency for the son to follow the profession of the father. Nor is it surprising that a great number of statesmen should be found in the upper class group. Men of letters are yielded by every class, perhaps especially by the clergy, but Shakespeare and, it is probable, Milton belonged to the families of yeomen. The sons of lawyers, one notes, even to a greater extent than the eminent men of " upper class " birth, eventu- ally find themselves in the House of Lords, and not always as lawyers. The two groups of Army and Medicine are numerically close together, but in other respects very unlike. The sons of army men form a very brilliant and versatile group, and include a large proportion of great soldiers ; the sons of doctors do not show a single eminent doctor, and if it were not for the presence of two men of the very first rank — Darwin and Landor — they would constitute a comparatively mediocre group. Painters and sculptors constitute a group which appears to be of very distinct interest from the point of view of occupational heredity. In social SOCIAL CLASS. 85 origin, it may be noted, the group differs strikingly in constitution from the general body, in which the upper class is almost or quite predominant. Of 63 painters and sculptors of definitely known origin, only two can be placed in the aristocratic division. Of the remainder 7 are the sons of artists, 22 the sons of craftsmen, leaving only 32 for all other occupations, which are mainly of lower middle class character, and in many cases trades that are very closely allied to crafts. Even, however, when we omit the trades as well as the cases in which the fathers were artists, we find a very notable predominance of craftsmen in the parentage of painters, to such an extent in- deed that while craftsman only constitute 9.2 per cent, among the fathers of our eminent persons generally, they constitute nearly 35 per cent, among the fathers of the painters and sculptors. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that there is a real connection between the father's aptitude for craftmanship and the son's aptitude for art. To suppose that environment adequately accounts for this relationship is an inadmissible theory. The association between the crafts of builder, carpenter, tanner, jeweller, watchmaker, wood- carver, rope-maker, etc., and the painter's art is small at the best, and in most cases non-existent. Nor, on the other hand, is there any reason what- 86 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. ever to conclude that the fathers have acquired manual dexterity which the sons have inherited and put to finer use. Without reverting to the hypothesis of the inheritance of acquired charac- teristics, we may well suppose that among crafts- men there is a natural selection of individuals possessing special dexterity of hand, and this ten- dency to manual skill would tend to be inherited. Such a supposition would adequately account for the phenomena which meet us in the present in- vestigation. That there is physical selection in occupations we know to be the case, so that, as Beddoe has shown, butchers tend to be fair and shoemakers to be dark. It may be noted that Arreat (Psychologic du Peintre, 1892, Ch. 11), in investigating the heredity of 200 emi- nent European painters, reached results that are closely similar to those I have reached in my smaller purely British group. He found that very few were of upper class social rank, and these not usually among the most important, while nearly two-thirds of the whole number were found to be the sons either of painters or of workers in some art or craft. He refers to the special frequency of jewellers among the fathers. I may remark that in my list, working jewellers and watchmakers occurred twice, a small number, but relatively large considering that there are only three fathers of this occupation in the total parentage of British men of ability. The group of painters and sculptors differs widely, SOCIAL CLASS. 87 as we have seen, so far as the social and occupa- tional status of their fathers is concerned, from the general composition of the whole group of eminent persons. The group of actors and ac- tresses, however, reverses altogether the conclu- sions we reach from contemplating the entire group. While good social class and leisurely cultivated life among the parents would seem on the whole to be of decided advantage for the pro- duction of eminent offspring, among actors and actresses low and obscure birth would seem to be a positive advantage. At least three or four were illegitimate children, while in numerous other cases we are led to infer that this was probably the case. Of the thirty whose origin is known, four and probably more — a very large proportion considering the smallness of the unskilled class — can be set down as the children of unskilled labourers or common soldiers, eleven are the children of actors, while the rest mainly belong to miscel- laneous and often somewhat unskilled occupations. Only six can be assigned to the whole group of professions (excluding the actor's profession), and only one can be said to belong to the upper class. Booth being the son of an impoverished squire with aristocratic connections. It is not difficult to account for this state of things. The some- what unbalanced and excessively impressionable 88 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. nervous system which is apt to result from ille- gitimate birth, or birth under abnormally Bohe- mian conditions, the poverty, irregularity, and manifold changes of occupation to which so many great actors and actresses have been subjected in early life, usually among varied and often low social strata, the absence of training and educa- tion in formal knowledge and conventional con- duct, combined with the abundant opportunity of becoming familiar with the most naturally dramatic section of the community — all these and other characteristics which have tended to mark the early lives of great actors and actresses, would tend to fit them for the histrionic profession and to unfit them for any other field in which natural ability may be shown. There is some interest in considering separately the eminent persons in my list, 8i in number, who died in the period during which the Dictionary of National Biography was being produced, and are therefore included in the Supplement. These may be expected to give us some indication as to the direction in which we may now look for our eminent men. So far as can be judged, however, from so, small a group, the social composition re- mains exactly the same. The aristocratic element is still very large. The most notable difference is that Commerce (represented by i8 individuals) SOCIAL CLASS. 89 has gained on the Church (which is represented by only 11) ; the Church has fallen to the pro- portion of less than 14 per cent., the general pro- portion of the Church for the whole period being 16.7 per cent. ; and Commerce has risen to over 22 per cent, as against 18.8. Whether the rela- tive ability-producing powers of the clergy and the commercial classes have changed, or whether, as is possible, the clergy now constitute a smaller and the commercial classes a larger element in the general population, is a question I do not undertake to answer. The quota produced by the medical profession has relatively risen, and that produced by the legal profession fallen (being only represented by one individual). More sig- nificant is the fact that the crafts instead of producing over nine per cent, have not produced one of this latest group of eminent men, while (unless the reticence of the national biographers is at fault) the artisan and unskilled classes have been equally unproductive. It would appear that the abiUty-producing powers of the com- munity are becoming narrowed on what is mainly a mixed aristocratic and commercial basis. In order to realise t^ie significance of our results it is necessary to bear in mind the class con- stitution of the ordinary population in Great Britain. According to the Anthropological Com- 90 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. mittee of the British Association, this may be stated as follows : — Professional classes Commercial classes Industrial classes Artisans Labourers 4.46 per cent. 10.36 „ 10.90 „ 26.82 „ 4746 „ The comparison with the class of ability-producing persons is interesting. We have two pyramids, but the base of the one corresponds with the apex of the other, the same inverted relationship existing harmoniously throughout. The aristo- cratic class which forms the foundation of the ability-producing pyramid (though this fact is slightly disguised by the omission from my list of hereditary peers) forms the fine and invisible apex of the pyramid constituted by the ordinary population. The professional class which (often in close association with the aristocratic class) forms the great bulk of the one pyramid still merely appears as the apex of the other. The commercial class also bulks more largely in the ability-producing pyramid, but to a much less extravagant extent. The industrial class (or craftsmen) which comes in the middle furnishes about the same proportion in each case, while the artisans and labourers who form nearly three- SOCIAL CLASS. 91 quarters of the general population appear among the ability-producing persons as a vanishing point almost as negUgible as the aristocratic class is among the general population. This is not altogether an unexpected result, though it has not before been shown to hold good for the entire field of the intellectual ability of a country. Maclean's statistical study of the origins of British men of abihty dunng the nineteenth century shows that 26 per cent, of those of known origin were sons of " aristocrats, officials, etc." ; 16 per cent, were sons of clergymen ; 15 per cent, sons of farmers, tradesmen, artisans, etc. ; 9 per cent, of mihtary and naval officers ; 9 per cent, of business men ; 5 per cent, of medical men ; 4 per cent, of lawyers, etc. The result was almost identical when the 100 men of pre-eminent abihty were considered separately. C. H. Cooley {Annals of American Academy, May, 1897) investigated the point in regard to a group of distinguished European poets, philosophers, and men of letters, and foimd that 45 belonged to the upper and upper middle classes, 24 to the lower middle class, and only 2 to the lower class. Odin, in a laborious though not always very illumina- tive study of French genius (Genese des Grands Hommes, vol. II., table 31), found that 623 talented people of letters, so far as the position of their parents was known, could be classed as : nobility, 25.5 per cent. ; magis- trature, 30 per cent. ; Uberal professions, 23 per cent. ; middle class, 11.6 per cent. ; industrial class, 9.8 per cent. Galton, among 107 recent EngUsh men of science 92 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. (English Men of Science, 1874, p. 22), found, as might be anticipated, that the aristocratic element was smaller, only 8.4 per cent. ; but the aUied professional class (army, navy, civil service, church, medicine, law, etc.) accounted for as much as 48.5 per cent. ; while the com- mercial class furnished nearly all the rest, 40.1. One is tempted to ask how far the industrial progress of the nineteenth century, the growth of factories, the development of urban hfe, will alter the conditions affecting the production of eminent men. It seems clear that, taking English history as a whole, the conditions of rural life have, from the present point of view, produced the best stocks. The minor aristocracy and the clergy — ^the "gentlemen " of England — hving on the soil in the open air, in a life of independence at once laborious and leisurely, have been able to give their children good opportunities for develop- ment, while at the same time they have not been able to dispense them from the necessity of work. Thus, at all events, it has been in the past. How it will be in the future is a question which the data before us in no way help to answer. So far as can be seen, the changing conditions of life have as yet made no change in the conditions required for producing genius. Life in the old towns formerly fertile in intellectual ability — towns like Edinburgh, Norwich, Ipswich and SOCIAL CLASS. 93 Plymouth — ^was altogether unlike life in our modem urban centres, and there is yet no sign that the latter will equal the former in genius- producing power. Nor is there any sign that the education of the proletariat will lead to a new development of eminent men ; the lowest class in Great Britain, so far as the data before us show, has not exhibited any recent tendency to a higher yield of genius, and what production it is accountable for remains rural rather than urban. 94 IV. HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. The tendency to heredity in intellectual ability — Inheritance of ability eqiially frequent through father and mother — Mental abnormality in the parents — Size of the families to which persons of eminent ability belong — Normal standards of comparison— Genius-producing families tend to be large — Men of ability tend to be the offspring of predominantly boy- producing parents — Women of ability perhaps tend to belong to girl- producing parents — Position in the family of the child of genius — Tendency of men of ability to be youngest and more especially eldest children — The age of the parents of eminent persons at their birth — Tendency to disparity of age in the parents. The heredity of intellectual genius has been very fully discussed, with special reference to eminent persons of British birth, by Mr. Francis Galton, especially in his Hereditary Genius. With, per- haps, even an excess of zeal — for persons of some- what minor degrees of ability have sometimes been taken into account — Mr. Galton has shown that intellectual abihty has frequently tended to run in families. If this hereditary tendency is by no means omnipresent, the present data prove conclusively that it is a very real factor. Not- withstanding that the effects of hereditary posi- HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 9S tion have been so far as possible excluded, and that our lists only contain persons of pre-eminent ability, distributed over fifteen centuries, it is yet found that among these 1,030 persons there are 41 groups, of two or three individuals in each group, who are closely related. The recognized relationships are father and son (the Arnolds, Bacon with his two sons, the Boyles, the Can- nings, the Coleridges, the Copleys, the Grenvilles, the L5d;tons, the Mathewses, the Mills, the Penns, the Pitts, the Walpoles, the Wilberforces), brother and brother (the Herberts, the Lawrences, the Napiers, the Nasmyths, the Newmans, the Scotts, the Veres, the Wesleys, the Wordsworths), brother and sister (the Arnes, the Carpenters, the Kembles, the Martineaus, the Rossettis), sister and sister (the Brontes). The relationship be- tween grandchildren and grandparents, and be- tween uncles (or aunts) and nephews (or nieces) is best shown in a table. Paternal Grandfather. Maternal Grandfather. Jevons Roscoe Darwin E. Darwin Wedgwood Donne J. Heywood Sidney Third Karl of Shaftesbury * First Eail of Shaftes- bury Duke of Northumber- land 96 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Paternal Uncle or Aunt. Maternal Uncle or Aunt. J. Baillie Hunter Beddoes M. Edgeworth G. Bentham J. Bentham Brougham Robertson Burnet Lord Warriston W. Hook T. Hook j F. A. Kemble 1 J. M. Kemble j S. Siddons 1 J. P. Kemble M. Kingsley C. Kingsley C. J. Mathews F. M. Kelly ) Christopher Wordsworth ( Charles Wordsworth W. Wordsworth It will be observed that Darwin has the unique distinction of possessing, within the nar- row degrees of relationship here recognised, both a paternal and a maternal ancestor of the high degree of eminence required for inclusion in my list. The table just presented is of considerable in- terest because it helps us to answer the question as to the degree in which genius may be inherited in the female line. A consideration of direct heredity has no bearing on this question ; a man inherits genius from his father more often than HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 97 from his mother for the simple reason that genius is rare in women. We reach a juster conclusion if we consider those cases in which the heredity is one degree removed, and then note whether it is transmitted more often in the male or in the female hne. All such cases in my list are included in the table just given, and we are thus enabled to see that, considering the smallness of the numbers with which we are dealing, the sexual partition of the heredity is as equal as we could possibly hope to expect. A man is just as Ukely to inherit abiUty through his mother as through his father. It will be noted that in the case of the four poets included in this table (Donne, Sidney, J. BaUlie, Beddoes), the heredity was in every case maternal. This would at first sight seem to confirm the conclusion of Mobius that a poet's heredity is from his mother. It must be added, however, that in most of these four cases there was also an unusual degree of abiUtyin the father, while only in one case was the eminent maternal relative a poet. It is held by some that artistic genius is very rarely inherited in any high degree. Thus Max MuUer wrote {Atttobiography, p. 34) : " It seems almost as if the artistic talent was exhausted by one generation or one individual," and he specially instances the rarity of eminent musicians who are the children of eminent musicians, the case of the Bachs being no true exception since music before J. S. Bach was usually simply a kind of craft. It is true that 7 98 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. not a single eminent musical composer (not a large group, be it noted) occurs in the list of related persons given above, but there are representatives of other arts, though not to any notably large extent. It is probable that what- ever truth Ues in the statement that high artistic abiUty is not inheritable may be reduced to the larger statement that " talent " is more inheritable than " genius." The distinction between " genius " and " talent " is, however, one that is extremely difficult to make, and we shall not be concerned with this question in the present volume. It is scarcely necessary to remark that in a very large number of cases the pre-eminent per- sons in our hst were nearly related to eminent persons who have not reached the degree of dis- tinction entitling them to appear in the list. Here an objective test is less easy to apply. The test I have adopted is the statement of the national biographers in referring to such relation- ship. The results of an inquiry on this basis distinctly confirm the result aheady reached as to the equal inheritance of intellectual abihty on the paternal and maternal sides. Avoiding any summation of the results until the two lists of eminent relations were finally completed, it was found that the numbers on each side were exactly equal On the father's side there were forty-four intellectually eminent relations, not including the father himself, and an exactly equal number on the mother's side. It is scarcely necessary HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 99 to point out that these numbers do not even ap- proximately represent the total number of emi- nent relations, for relationship to one eminent person often involves relationship to a whole family of eminent persons ; they merely serve to show that when the eminent near relations of an eminent man are impartially noted^ such rela- tions are just as often through the mother as through the father. I have also noted every case in which it is stated or implied that one or other, or both, of the parents possessed an unusual amount of in- tellectual ability, by no means necessarily in- volving any degree whatever of " eminence;" These cases are very numerous, and as such ability may often have been displayed in very unobtrusive ways, it must frequently have es- caped the attention of the national biographers. In 150 cases the father showed such abihty ; in 89 cases the mother is noted as of unusual ability, or else as being closely related to some person of eminent abihty presumed to have transmitted an intellectual aptitude, whether or not she showed marked signs of such aptitude herself. In 21 of these cases both the father and the mother pro- bably transmitted intellectual aptitudes. Over 20 per cent, of our 1,030 eminent persons have certainly inherited intellectual aptitudes. Bearing 7* lOO A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. in mind that in many cases the aptitudes of the parents are unknown or have passed unnoticed, and that in other cases the national biographers have failed to record known facts, it is not improb- able that the proportion of cases in which one or other of the parents of our 1,030 eminent persons displayed more than average intellectual ability may be at least doubled. A more probable estimate of the real frequency of heredity may be obtained by considering, sepa- rately the very recent and better known indivi- duals who appear in the Supplement of the Dic- tionary of National Biography. Of the 81 eminent persons, thus incorporated in my list, who died while the Dictionary was in progress, it is found that in the case of 33 the father, the mother, or both are noted as being persons of unusual ability. This is equal to a proportion of about 40 per cent., or the proportion in which, on independent grounds, I have already suggested as representing the probable amount of inherited ability. Even for the modern group, however, we must still suppose the data to be incomplete. From another point of view the consideration of this modern group is of interest in the Ught it throws on the question of heredity. I find that among the 38 able parents of the 33 eminent per- sons who may be supposed to have inherited HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. lOi ability, the sexual division comes out as exactly equal ; that is to say, that there are 19 able fathers and 19 able mothers. This would seem to indicate very clearly that, although that super- lative degree of ability which is commonly termed " genius " is rare in woman, yet a more than average degree of ability in the mother is just as important from the point of view of intellectual heredity as a more than average degree of ability in the father. Among modern English scientific men Gallon (English Men of Science, p. 72) has also found that ability is just as Ukely to be inherited through the female as through the male line. Among 100 scientific men, on the paternal side he found 34 grandfathers and uncles of abiUty, on the maternal side 37. As in my results, there would seem to be an excess, if any, on the maternal side. In determining the parents who possessed abihty I have taken no note of the cases in which it is merely said that the father or the mother possessed " poetic tastes," " musical tastes," etc., but only ,of those cases in which it is clearly stated or implied that there was unusual ability. Such " ability " in most cases by no means in- volved recognised " distinction." As a matter of fact only one of the 81 had a parent of the same degree of eminence as himself, «.^., sufficiently 102 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. eminent to be included in my list. So that while the proportion of eminent persons with an " able " parent approaches one in two, the proportion of eminent persons possessing a parent equally " distinguished " with themselves is only one in 8i. This proportion of eminent parents is shown not to be very far astray by reference to the whole body of individuals on my list, among whom there are fifteen possessing a parent of sufficient eminence to be included in the list, or about one in seventy. If we lowered the standard of distinction demanded in the parents the pro- portion would of course be raised. It would be interesting to inquire into the moral and emotional qualities, the " character," of the parents. This, however, is extremely diffi- cult and I have not attempted it. In a great many cases the mother was a woman of marked piety, and we are frequently led to infer an un- usual degree of character, sometimes on the part of the mother, sometimes of the father. Moral qualities are quite as essential to most kinds of genius as intellectual qualities, and they are, perhaps, even more highly transmissible. They form the basis on which intellectual development may take place, and they may be transmitted by a parent in whom such development has never occurred. The very frequent cases in which men HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 103 of eminent intellectual ability have declared that they owed everything to their mothers * have sometimes been put aside as the expressions of an amiable weakness. It requires some credulity, however, to beheve that men of pre-eminent, or even less than pre-eminent, intellectual acuteness are unable to estimate the character of their own parents. The frequent sense of indebtedness to their mothers expressed by eminent men may be taken as largely due to the feeling that the in- heritance of moral or temperamental qualities is an even more massive and important inheritance than definite intellectual aptitudes. Such inheri- tance coming to intellectual men from their mothers may often be observed where no definite intellectual aptitudes have been transmitted. It is not, however, of a kind which can well be re- corded in biographical dictionaries, and I have not, therefore, attempted to estimate its frequency in the group of pre-eminent persons under con- sideration. I have, however, attempted to estimate the frequency of one other form of anomaly in the parents besides intellectual abihty. The parents of persons of eminent intellectual power may not * A remark of Huxley's in a letter to the present writer, — " Mentally and physically I am a piece of my mother," — may be taken as typical of such declarations. I04 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. themselves have been characterized by unusual intellect ; but they may have shown mental anomaly by a lack of aptitude for the ordinary social life in which they were placed. In at least 57 cases (or over 5 per cent.) we find that the fathers were extravagant, unsuccessful in business, shiftless, idle, drunken, brutal, or otherwise fell into bad habits and neglected their families. In such cases, we may conclude, the father has transmitted to his eminent child an inaptness to foUow the beaten tracks of life, but he has not transmitted any accompanying aptitude to make new individual tracks. This hst could easily be enlarged if we included milder degrees of in- effectiveness. A certain degree of inoffensive eccentricity, recalling Parson Adams, seems to be not very uncommon among the fathers of men of eminent abiUty, and perhaps furnishes a transmissible temperament on which genius may develop. It may be noted that six of the ne'er-do- weel fathers (a very large proportion) belonged to eminent women. This may be simply due to the fact that a ne'er-do-weel father, by forcing the daughter to leave home or to provide for the family, furnishes a special stimulus to her latent ability. In 403 cases I have been able to ascertain with a fair degree of certainty the size of the families HEREPITY AND PARENTAGE. 105 to which these persons of eminent abiUty belong. A more than fair degree of certainty has not been attainable, owing to the loose and inexact way in which the national biographers frequently state the matter. Sometimes we are only told that the subject of the article is " the child " or " the son " ; this may mean the only child, but it is impossible to accept such a statement as evidence regarding the size of the family, and the number of families with only children may possibly thus have been unduly diminished. Again, the biographers in a very large number of cases ignore the daughters, and from this cause again their statements become valueless. In estimating the nataUty of the families pro- ducing children of abiUty I have never knowingly reckoned the offspring of previous or subsequent marriages ; so far as possible, we are only con- cerned with the fecundity of the two parents of the eminent persons. So far as possible, also, I have reckoned the gross fecundity, i.e., the number of children born, not the number of chil- dren surviving ; in the case of a large number of eminent men this gross fertility is known from the inspection of parish registers ; in a certain proportion of cases it is probable, however, that we are only dealing with the surviving children. On the whole, the ascertainable size of the family io6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. may almost certainly be said to be under the mark. It is, therefore, the more remarkable that the average size of genius-producing families is found to be larger than that of normal families. The average size of our genius-producing famiUes is 6.5. In order to effect an exact comparison with normal families, I have looked about for some fairly comparable series of figures, and am satis- fied that I have found it in the results of an inquiry by Mr. F. Howard Collins concerning 4,390 families.* These families furnish an ex- cellent normal standard for comparison ; they deal mainly with " Anglo-Saxon " people (in England and America) of the middle and upper classes ; they represent, with probably but very slight errors of record, gross fertility ; they are apparently not too recent, and they betray little evidence of the artificial limitation of families. The mean size of ColUns's group of fertile families is found by Pearson to be 4.52 children. This conclusion as to the abnormally large size of the families from which genius tends to spring may be criti- cised in two directions. It may be argued that there has been no recognition of the possibly larger size of the normal family in the earlier periods which my * As quoted by Karl Pearson, TAe Chances of Death, vol. I., p. 70. In passing through Mr. Pearson's mathematical hands the 4,390 emerge a 4,444, and it is on this number that my percentages for normal families ar based. HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 107 list covers. It may be said further that even the size of the modem normal family has been underestimated. It is unnecessary to speculate concerning the average size of the normal family in former days until definite evidence is brought forward. But I may point out that the large size of genius-producing families holds good even when we only take into account the nineteenth century persons on my hst. If, for instance, we consider separately the 39 individuals from the supplement to the Dictionary concerning whom I have definite data, it is found that the average size of the famUies is 5.7, and nine out of the number belong to families containing from nine to seventeen children. I may add that at an earUer stage in my inquiry (see Popular Science Monthly, April, 1901, p. 598) I found that the size of the families from which British men of genius spring was stiU larger than the present average of 6.5, being nearly 7 (6.96). The reduction in size is due in part, it would seem, to the large number of persons of comparatively minor ability who have since been added, and perhaps in part to a tendency to sUghtly decreased size among the families from which have sprung the quite recent individuals contained in the Dictionary of National Biography. In regard to the correct estimation of the average size of the normal family, it must be said that while my results for British genius-producing families are, without doubt, distinctly too low on account of the imperfection of the data, yet every estimate of the average size of the normal family, although founded on much more complete data, yields an average decidedly below 6.5. Thus Ansell found the average size of the fa,mily, counting aU children bom aUve, among the English professional classes, to be about 5, or, more precisely, clergy 5.25, legal 5.18, io8 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. medical 4.82. (C. Ansell, On the Rate of Mortality and other Statistics of Families, 1874). Galton found the mean of 204 marriages 4.65 children, Pearson the mean of 378 fertile marriages 4.70 children. A very interesting table is given in Mrs. Henry Sidg- wick's Health Statistics of Women Students of Cambridge and Oxford and of their Sisters, 1890. Mrs. Sidgwick found that these students (566 in number) belonged to families of which the average size was as high as 6.8 children. (It must be Said that this result is shghtly vitiated by the inclusion of 70 half brothers and sisters.) One is inclined to look upon the result as necessarily presenting the normal average for the famihes of the class from which these students spring. It must, however, be borne in mind that these figures refer largely to the early days of the higher education of women ; we may be fairly certain that a considerable proportion of these students were women of unusual intellectual abihty, and that in numerous other cases they belonged to families in which the brothers showed high ability. The result therefore represent! not the average fertiUty of the pro- fessional and allied classes from which these students spring, but is complicated by the considerable admixture of the special abiUty-producing group of the population with its high fertility. This interpretation is clearly supported by Mrs. Sidgwick's tables. She has presented separately the results of a large group containing the Honours Students, and we are hereby enabled to discern the notable fact that the Honours Students belong to decidedly larger families than do the students generally. In students generally the 6-children families constitute the largest group ; for the Honours division the 8-chil- dren group is the largest, while very large families are HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 109 relatively much more frequent among the Honours divi- sion than among the division of " other students," so that, for instance, while among Honours students exactly the same number belong to ii-children families as to 2- chUdren families, among " other students " more than twice as many belong to 2-children families as to 11- chUdren families. Mrs. Sidgwick's results may, therefore be said to confirm the results reached in the present investigation. It may be added that the greater fertility which has been shown to mark the families from which British persons of ability in general have sprung, has already been shown by Galton to mark the special group of famihes from which modern British men of science spring. Galton fovmd {English Men of Science) that the average ntunber of brothers and sisters (excluding, for the most part, those who died in infancy) was 6.3. This indicates, as we should expect, a decidedly higher fertility than in the families producing the women students, though probably not higher than would have been shown by the British ability-producing families generally, had my data been more complete. Yoder, in studying the early lives of 50 eminent men of various nationaUties belonging to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (A. H. Yoder, " Boyhood of Great Men," Pedagogical Seminary, Oct. 1894,), found that the average number of children in the families from which they sprang, excluding half brothers and sisters, was 6-I-. This approximates to the result here reached as regards British eminent men only. It win be seen that the high fertility which we have found among ability-producing families stands in opposi- tion to the well-known tendency to small families among no A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. the higher human races and to the universal tendency, weU marked at the present day, for a falling birth-rate to be associated with a rising level of civilisation and well- being. Within the same nation, also, the families of the poorer classes are larger than those of the richer classes ; thus in Holland at the present day, both in town and country, the average number of children per marriage in the poorest class is 5.19, against 4.50 for the rich class. It would, however, be a mistake to suppose that our results can properly be regarded as unexpected. They are, on the contrary, in harmony with all that we know concerning the fertility of the families producing the nervously abnormal classes, which is on the whole decidedly high. Toulouse (Causes de la Folie, 1896, p. gi) has summarised the evidence accumulated by Ball and Regis, as weU as by Marandon de Montyel, showing that the size of the families from which the insane spring is decidedly larger than the usual average. Professor Magri (" Le Famiglie dalle quali discendono i Dehnquenti," Arch, di Psichiatria, 1896, fasc. VI. — VII.) has further shown that this abnormally great fertility is by no means confined to insanity-producing famihes, but also characterises the progenitors of numerous other mentally abnormal groups. Thus he found that criminals in the majority of cases spring from large families, and that although the average size of the normal family in Italy is three or four, it was very rarely possible to find a criminal who belonged to a family of only two or three children. Magri also found that hysteria and neuras- thenia are notably frequent in large families. Langdon Down had previously pointed out [Mental Affections of Childhood) that imbeciles and weak-minded HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. Ill children tend to belong to large families ; he found the average number of living children in the families con- taining idiots to be as high as 7. In Berlin Cassel (Was lehrt die Untersuchung der geistig minderwertigen Schutkinder, 1901) found that the average size of the families from which defective children spring is over 7. Comparing in more detail the composition of our genius-producing families with, the normal average, we obtain the following results : — Size of family . . I 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 Normal families . Genius - producing families . . . 12.2 6.9 14.7 9.4 iS-3 10.6 14. 1 9.4 11. 1 10. 1 8.6 10.4 7.8 8.9 6.3 6.7 Size of family. . 9 10 II 12 13 14 Over 14. Normal families . Genius - producing families . . . 3-9 5-1 2.7 4-7 1.4 4.9 1.0 4.4 •s 2.2 .2 1-9 .1 3-4 Unless, as is scarcely probable, the mental eccentricities of biographers lead to very frequent selection on definite hnes, it will be seen that in genius-producing families there is an in- variable deficiency of famiUes below the average normal size, and a gradually increasing excess of families above that size. In the largest size 112 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. group (over 14) the excess becomes extrava- gantly large ; this, however, may be partly accounted for ; probably the biographers have here less seldom failed to record the size of the family, so this group may have been more care- fully recruited from the families of our 1,030 eminent persons. Even on this basis, however, it remains extremely large. Ansell found that in 2,000 marriages there was no family of more than 18 children ; and in Denmark, it is stated, a family of 22 children only occurs once in 34,000 marriages.* An interesting point, and one which can scarcely be affected at all by any twist in the biographical mind, is the fact that our men of ability (the women are here excluded) are the offspring of predominantly boy-producing parents. Taking the 180 famihes in which the number of boys and girls in the family is clearly stated, excluding those (29 in number) which are known to consist only of boys, we find that there are about six boys to five girls, or more exactly 121 * In our genius-producing group there are four families of more than 19 children. Doddridge was the youngest of 20 children ; Popham was the youngest of his mother's 21 children ; Colet was the eldest and only surviving child of 22 ; Dempster was, or stated himself to be, the 24th of 29 children. We cannot be absolutely sure that in every case we are dealing with a single couple. It may be added that much larger families are from time to time recorded as produced by a single couple. I may refer for instance to the record {Brit. Med. Jour., 12th Oct., 1901) of a family of 36 children; in such a case there are of course numerous plural births. HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 113 boys to 100 girls. The normal proportion of the sexes at birth at the present time in England is about 104 boys to 100 girls. It is in accord- ance with the predominantly boy-producing tendency of families jdelding men of genius that the famihes 5delding women of genius should show a predominantly girl-producing tendency. Here, indeed, our cases are too few to prove much, but the results are definite enough as far as they go. Putting aside the families con- sisting only of girls, the sexual ratio is almost reversed ; there are about six girls to five boys ; or, more exactly, the ratio is 79 boys to 100 girls. We find that among the children of parents producing an eminent man there are 55 per cent, boys to 45 per cent, girls ; among the children of parents producing an eminent woman there are only 45 per cent, boys to 54 per cent, girls. Putting the matter in another way, we may say that, while in .every ten families from which men of genius spring, the boys predominate in six families ; in the families from which women of genius spring the boys predominate only in about three. Ansell found in England (els has Geissler in Saxony) that there are normally a larger number of boys in large families than in smaU families ; in families of 1-5 children he found the proportion of males to females 1,033 to 8 114 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. i,ooo ; in families of 6-10 children, 1,075 to 1,000 ; in families of 11 children and over, 1,083 to 1,000. It will be seen, however, that this tendency is by no means sufficiently marked to furnish a sufficing explanation of the large preponderance of boys in the families producing eminent men ; nor will it account at all for the apparently large excess of girls — this, however, being based on only a small number of cases — in the families producing eminent women. I may add that while not an all-sufficing explanation, the tendency pointed out by Ansell is evidently a real factor in this peculiarity among the families producing men of ability. I have found it holds good within the limits of the families producing men of ability. Taking at random 25 families with five or fewer children, I find that the girls are in an absolute and decided majority, while in another series, taken equally at random, of 25 famihes containing eight or more children, males are to females in the proportion of 130 to 100. It is possible that some light is thrown on the preva- lence of boys in large families by the facts observed among animals. It is believed by many authorities that excess of maternal nourishment tends to produce females, and it has also been found that mares over 14 years of age tend to produce colts {Veterinarian, i Aug., 1895). In large families the maternal nourishment would tend to be decreased by much child-bearing. It is note- worthy — although I have not systematically investigated this point — that the interval between the birth of the eminent person and the previous child is often very short. Yoder, who especially attended to this point, found that in the 26 cases in which the point could be ascer- tained, the interval was 22.87 months, while the average HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 115 time in the family, for 30 cases, was 25.36 months. This suggests that it is possible that the maternal exhaustion which tends to produce males also tends to produce children of eminent abiUty. It may be said on the whole that this excessive boy- producing tendency of the families which produce men of genius is really the resultant of the combined action of a number of factors, each of which, occurring separ- ately, tends to produce a slighter but still abnormally large excess of boys. Not only would it appear that large families, and families in which the children follow very rapidly, tend to yield a large excess of boys, but observations on man and on other animals indicate that an undue excess of males is also found when the age of the father is unduly advanced (see e.g., A. J. Wall, Lancet, 1887), when the age of the mother is unusually advanced, when the disparity of age between the parents is unusually great, and when the parents live in the country and are occupied in country pursuits. All these conditions which favour the production of boys have also — as we have seen or shall see — favoured the production of genius in Great Britain. (For a study of the facts and theories bearing on the excess of male births, see A. Rauber, Der Ueberschuss an Knabenge- burten und seine Biologische Bedeutung, 1900.) I have made a tentative effort to ascertain what position in the family the child of genius is most likely to occupy. In a large number of cases we are only told his position as a son, not as a child ; these are, of course, excluded. In order to investigate this point I considered 8* ii6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. the families of at least eight children (and sub- sequently those of at least seven children) and noted where the genius child came. This showed a very abnormally large proportion of eminent first children, and also abnormally few second and third children. Suspecting that certain peculiarities of the biographical mind (needless to enter into here, since we are not investigating the psychology of biographers) may have some- what affected this result, I have confined myself to a simple inquiry less likely to be affected by any mental tendencies of the biographers. In families of different sizes, what relation do eldest genius children and youngest genius children bear to genius children of intermediate position ? The results are very decisive, and are shown in the following table. Size of Family. Position of Eminent Child. Eldest. Intermediate. Youngest. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO II 12 13 14 Over 14 IS IS 10 10 8 15 2 8 5 3 1 I I 6 16 18 20 14 17 7 10 12 10 4 5 9 12 II 3 7 6 S 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 4 HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 117 It would appear that there is a special hability for eldest and youngest children to be born with intellectual aptitudes, the hability being greater in the case of the eldest than of the youngest, for there are altogether 94 eldest children to 67 youngest children, the inter- mediate children numbering 148 ; or 30 per cent, are eldest children, 21 per cent, youngest children, and 47 per cent, intermediate. It will be seen that while the eldest and youngest chUdren of abihty absolutely outnumber those of inter- mediate position, notwithstanding the large average size of the famihes producing children of abihty, and the consequently much greater number of chances possessed by the intermediate children as a group, the chances of the eldest attaining eminence as compared with the chances of the youngest are not the same throughout. In the small and medium-sized families it is the eldest who most frequently achieves fame ; in the large famihes it is the youngest. It may be added that if we were to take into considera- tion the survivors of a family only (or the net fertiHty) the youngest children would occupy a stiU more conspicuous position. This predominance of eldest children and youngest children among persons of genius accords with the results reached by Yoder in stud5dng an international group ii8 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. of 50 eminent men {Am. Jour. Psychology, Oct., 1894, p. 146) ; he found that youngest sons occurred oftener than intermediate sons and eldest sons oftener than youngest. Galton, in his inquiries as to recent British men of science, reached the same result, finding 36 intermediate sons, 15 youngest sons, and 26 eldest sons. (Galton, English Men of Science, pp. 33-4.). It must be added that this result is absolutely in ac- cordance with what a consideration of other mentally abnormal groups would lead us to expect. Sir Arthur Mitchell appears to have been the first to point out many years ago (Edinburgh Medical Journal, Jan., 1866) that among idiots the youngest bom and especially the eldest born largely predominate over the intermediate children ; he found that among 433 idiots and imbeciles 31 per cent, were first-born children and 20 per cent, last- born. It will be seen that the proportion of eldest and youngest children among Mitchell's idiots and imbeciles is almost identical with the proportion found among British persons of genius. Langdon Down (Mental Affections of Childhood) confirmed this conclusion, as re- gards the tendency of both eldest and youngest children to be imbecile, and Shuttleworth (Brit. Med. Jour., 17 Nov., 1900, p. 1446) has confirmed it so far as youngest chil- dren are concerned. Criminals have also been found to be in undue proportion first-born children (L. Winter, States Hospital Bull. 1897, p. 463, as quoted by Nacke), and Dugdale found that the first-bom child tends to be a criminal and the last-born a pauper. It would appear (see e.g. MoU, Untersuchungen iiber die Libido Sexualis. Bd. I., p. 19) that there is some ground for believing that sexual inversion tends especially to appear among eldest and youngest children. It may be added that, according HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 119 to Sir J. Humphrey, in racing stables opinion is not favourable as regards firstlings. It is interesting to find that the same points have been brought out as regards normal school children. This question was specially studied in its wider bearings at Professor Starbuck's suggestion by Mr. G. S. Wells, among a large number of children at San Jose, Cahfomia (G. S. Wells, A Study of the Order of the Birth of Children, 1901. I am indebted to Professor Starbuck for enabling me to see this study in MS.). The children were investigated by trained observers, and their position noted as regards weight, height, weight-discrimination, reaction time, voluntary action, abiUty, endurance, mental ability, neatness and deportment. In nearly all these respects it was found that eldest children tend to show best, and that youngest children, while inferior to eldest, were superior to intermediate children. Out of numerous curves, fourteen show the first group highest, six the last group highest, only two the intermediate group. The tendency to nervous abnormality in first-born children would seem to be further indicated by the obser- vations of Miss Carman {Am. Jour. Psych., Ap., 1899) that first-bom boys are more sensitive, as estimated by the temple algometer, than second or subsequent chil- dren. She also found that the first-bom boys are strongest with the dynamometer. Macdonald {Boston Med. and Surg. Jour.,zAvig., 1901) found that first-born men and women are more sensitive to pain than second- born. I may remark that I had been impressed twenty-five years ago by the tendency of men of genius to be eldest- born children, although I was not then acquainted with Galton's investigations. It appears to be a popular I20 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. belief (H. Campbell, Causation of Disease, p. 262, com- bats [this belief) that the first-born child is inferior. Shandy said that thg eldest son is the blockhead of the family. On the other hand, there are popular beliefs in the other direction. Thus in Northern Iceland (Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologie, 1900, heft 2 & 3, p. 74) it is believed that the first-bom child, whether boy or girl, surpasses the others in strength, stature, beauty, wisdom, virtue, and good fortune, and in olden times the eldest child possessed certain privileges not accorded to the others. These conflicting popular beliefs are fuUy accounted for by the actual facts. The eldest-bom represents the point of greatest variation in the family, and the variations thus produced may be in either direc- tion, useful or useless, good or bad. Whenever it has been possible^ I have noted the age of the father at the birth of his eminent child. It has been possible to ascertain this in 299 cases^and the data thus obtained may be considered as fairly free from fallacy, so far as the biographical mind is concerned, though we may be sure that the biographers would not neglect to mention the two or three known cases in which that age was extremely youthful or advanced. The range of age is considerable, from sixteen, the age of Napier of Merchiston's father at his son's birth, to seventy-nine, the age of Charles Leslie's father, the periods of potency in the case of the fathers of persons of eminent ability thus ranging over sixty-three years. The HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 121 299 cases may be grouped in five-year age- as follows : periods Age of Fathers. Under 20 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 Number of Fathers . Percentages . . . 2 •6 9 3 45 IS 81 27 59 19 Age of Fathers. 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 and over. Number of Fathers . Percentages . . . 44 14 30 10 13 4 S 2 8 2 It will be seen that the most frequent age of fatherhood is from 30 to 34, but there are two separate years of maximum frequency, 34 and 36, each with 19 cases. A prevalence of elderly fathers seems indicated by the fact that the general average falls later than this maximum, being 37.1 years. For one father who begets an eminent child before the age of maximum paternity, — which is also, we may assume, the age of maximum general vigour, — there are nearly three who beget an eminent child when that age is past. This result is the more significant when we remember that we are chiefly deaUng with the upper social 122 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. classes (for it is in their cases that these facts are most easily ascertained), and that we nniust probably exclude the recent tendency to retarda- tion of the age of marriage. I have thought that it may be of interest to separate from the main body the one hundred most recent of the eminent persons on my list (all born in the nineteenth century) and to con- sider how the ages of their fathers are distributed. The result is as follows : Age . . . 2C3 — 25— 30— 35- 40— 45— 50- 55- Number . . I i8 30 18 14 14 4 I The most frequent age is 34, but the average age is 37, being almost equal to the average for the fathers of the whole group, so that this factor in the biological constitution of the genius group would appear to be fairly uniform throughout and independent of social and economic changes, except that the age of the fathers has perhaps tended in the course of time to become slightly lower. Although this decrease in age is very trifling, it appears to be confirmed by the results yielded if we make a separate group of the 71 individuals born before the eighteenth century the age of whose fathers HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 123 I have been able to determine. The distribution is as follows : Under 20 20 — 25— so- 35- 40— 45- 50- 55— 60 and over. 2 3 13 la 14 10 7 2 4 3 The most frequent age here, taking the years separately, is as low as 25, but on the other hand the average age is slightly higher than that for the general group, being 37.2. It is possible that this shghtly higher age — very trifling as it is — ^indicates a real tendency. The further we go back the higher becomes the intellectual average of the individuals we are dealing with, and there is some reason to suppose that with such high average intellectual level, the average age of the fathers is also higher, and the range of varia- tion is greater. Such trifling fluctuations would be negligible if they did not all point in one direction. I may refer to another indication which helps to confirm the conclusion that when we are deahng with a group of men of very high intel- lectual eminence the average age of their fathers is shghtly higher than when we are deahng with a group o lower eminence. On separating into a distinct group all those eminent men on my list who are also included in the first three hundred (i.e., the most eminent section) of Professor 124 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Cattell's one thousand most eminent persons in history (see ante, p. 8), we obtain a group of 37 individuals who are without doubt of a higher level of intellectual ability than the general average of the British group. The age of the fathers of the pre-eminent men in this special group is as high as 37.7 years. The ages of the fathers of Gallon's recent British men of science in 100 cases were distributed as foUows : 20 — 25- 30— 35- 40— 45- 50- I 15 34 22 17 7 4 The average was 36. These results as regards this group may very fairly be compared with the results reached concerning the contemporaneous group of 100 from my list which has been separately calculated. It will be seen that in the more mixed and more eminent British group, as might be anticipated, the variations are greater ; there are a larger proportion alike of younger and of elderly fathers. In Yoder's group of 39 fathers of men of various nationalities whose average eminence was of higher degree than mine and much higher than Gallon's, the numbers are too small to bear much weight ; they were distributed as foUows, with an average age of 37.78 years : 20— 25- 30— 35— 40— 45— 50- 55- 60— I 2 10 13 7 3 2 I HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 125 The most notable point here, as compared with either Galton's results or mine, is the marked deficiency of fathers mider 30. It will be noticed that the average age of the fathers in Galton's, mine, and Yoder's groups rises progressively (36, 37.1., 37.78) with the intellectual enainence of the group. It may well be that this is not a casual coincidence. The tendency for the fathers of men of genius to be elderly had, as Yoder points out, already been noted by Lombroso {Man of Genius, p. 149). According to AnseU {On the Rate of Mortality, etc., 1874), the average age of fathers of the professional and allied classes (estimated as the length of a generation, i.e., the difference between the age of father and son) is 36.6. An average tells us nothing concerning the range of veiriation, but it may be observed that this normal average approximates to that obtained in the most nearly normal of the groups of ability we are here able to compare. I have no other data concerning the normal ages of the fathers of the professional and upper classes in modem England, and in any case we could not be sure how far such data could be comparable with that presented by our group of eminent persons which is spread over many centuries. The influence of the age of the fathers in various normal and abnormal groups of the population has been most carefully and elaborately studied by Marro in North Italy (in his Caratteri dei Delinquenti, and more recently in La Pubertd). Marro regards fathers below the age of twenty- six as belonging to the period of immaturity ; the period of maturity is from twenty-six to .forty, and the period of decadence from forty-one onwards. He found, among the normal population, that 9 per cent, fathers belonged to the first period, 66 per cent, to the second, and 25 per 126 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. cent, to the third. Among the fathers of criminals there was an increase both of immature and of decadent fathers at the expense of the mature, while among the insane fathers there was a similar but more marked in- crease of immature and decadent fathers. In stud5dng the age of the fathers of school children, Marro found that while children of good intelligence are mostly the offspring of young fathers, those of the highest grade of intelligence are mostly the children of middle-aged and elderly fathers. He found also that the highest pro- portion of very defectively intelligent children belonged to elderly fathers. Aristotle had long before said that the children of very young or very old people are imper- fect in mind or body. We may slightly modify that ancient dictum by saying that the children of such people tend to be abnormal. I have only been able to ascertain the age of the mother in 86 instances. In. these cases it is distributed as follows : Age of Mother- Under 20 20-24 25-29 30-34 3S-39 40-44 45-49 ; so Number of Cases... I 14 22 23 13 II I I Per cent.... I.I 16 25 26 IS 12 I.I ] I.I The average age of the mothers is 31.2 years. Taking the years separately we find that there are only three mothers at the age of 25 and only two at 26, when there is a sudden rise to ten at the age of 27, representing the chief maximum ; HEREDITY AND"" PARENTAGE. 127 there is, however, a secondary maximum (of eight cases) at 30, and again (also of eight cases) at 33. On the whole, it will be seen, the ages of the mothers exhibit the same tendency to late parenthood which marks the fathers. Instead of falling earher, as we should expect, the age of maximum frequency for the mothers falls within the same five years as for the fathers, and the number of mothers who have reached the sex- ually advanced age of 40 is nearly as large as the number of those below the age of 25. This is the more remarkable since the predominant tendency of our men of ability to be first-born children would lead us to expect a corresponding predominance of young women among their mothers. In Galton's 100 cases of mothers of modem British men of science the average age was thirty, and the dis- tribution was as follows : — Under 20 20 — 2S- 30— 3S- 40— 45- 2 20 26 34 12 S I It will be seen that in my list of mothers of British persons of abihty, the intellectual eminence being greater than in Galton's, there is a comparative deficiency of young mothers (indeed^ for all ages under 35), and a very marked excess of elderly mothers, while the average age also is 128 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. higher than in Galton's. Yoder found the average age of the mothers in his group to be 29.8, but he is only able to bring forward twenty cases. Marro in his study of the ages of the mothers of North Italian criminals, insane, school children, etc., found that the relations that existed between the different groups were very much the same as in the cases of the fathers. The influence of the age of the parents on the children as regards various kinds of mental and nervous ability has been investigated in California by Mr. R. S. Holway, and I am indebted to Professor Starbuck for enabling me to see Mr. Holway's study in MS. (The Age of Parents : Its Effects Upon Children, a thesis presented to the Department of Education, Leland Stanford Junior University, 1901). It was found that, while in most physical quahties the children of mature parents tend to come out best, in mental abihty the children of young parents show best at an early age, but rapidly lose their precocity ; the elder children who show best tend to be the parents of mature and old parents ; the exception- ally brilliant children show a tendency to be the offspring of old parents ; the children of elderly mothers show a tendency to superiority throughout. Ansell found that the normal age of mothers in British professional and allied class (estimated as length of a generation) is as high as 32.3 years, but in the absence of information as to distribution we cannot determine the significance of this result. Among the general popu- lation of poor class, Collins {Practical Treatise of Mid- wifery) found that the most frequent age of maternity in Ireland (where early marriages are common) was between 25 and 29, the average age being 27. In Edin- HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 129 burgh and Glasgow, however, Matthews Duncan {Fecun- dity, Fertility, Sterility, and Allied Topics, 2nd ed., 1871) found the average age in a similar class of the population to be above 29, the distribution being as follows : Age Below 20 »— . 25- 30— 35— 40- 4S- 50- Per cent. 2.30 22.62 30.89 23.61 14.76 5- IS •58 •03 It will be seen that this distribution closely corre- sponds with that of the mothers of Galton's men of science, but shows much fewer cases at the higher ages than does my group. The conclusion that among the parents of our men of genius there is an abnormally large proportion of elderly mothers is confirmed by the normal data furnished by Roberton (J. Roberton, Essays and Notes on the Physiology and Diseases of Women, 1851, p. 183). He found that among 10,000 pregnant women in Manchester, only 4.3 per cent, were over 40, i.e., were at least in their forty-first year. From a consideration of these various groups of data, among the mothers of highly intellectual children there would certainly appear to be some deficiency of very young mothers, and there is a decided excess of elderly mothers. If, as we may conclude from the marked prevalence of first-born children among our British people of ability, this tendency to a some- what advanced age of the parents is associated with late marriages, we perhaps have here one of the factors in the prevalence of an excess of boys in the families producing eminent men, since, as Ahlfeld has shown {Arch. f. Gyndk, 1876, Bd. IX. p. 448), there is 9 I30 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. a gradual though not altogether regular increase with age in the proportion of boys, among primij>arcB be-; tween the ages of 28 and 36, so that while at the earher age there were at Leipzig no boys to 100 girls, at the later age there were 190 boys to 100 girls. It may be noted that in at least 44 cases the mother was a second or third wife. This group is a somewhat distinguished one, including F. Bacon, R. Boyle, Bunyan, Byron, Chaucer, S. T. Coleridge, and Raleigh. The list is certainly very incomplete. In at least nine cases the father was a second husband. It is instructive tp compare the ages of the parents and to ascertain the degree of disparity. I have only been able to do this in 71 cases. There is a marked tendency to disparity which ranges up to 49 years.* In 55 cases the father was older. The distribution of the various degrees of dis- parity may be seen in the following table : Amount of Disparity None. 1-4 yrs. S-9 yrs. 10-14 ys. 1S-19 yrs. Over ao yrs. ~ Number of Cases. 4 24 24 13 3 3 * This very exceptional case was that of the father (an eminent bishop) of Charles Leslie, the nonjuring divine. In this case the father was 79, the mother 30. HEREDITY AND PARENTAGE. 131 The average amount of disparity for the whole of the 71 cases is as high at 7.7 years. It will be seen that the number of cases in which the disparity was at least ten years is equal to a proportion of over 26 per cent. According to Ansell, the mfean difference in ages of ^usband and wife among the professional classes in England during the nineteenth century was 4.16 years ; before 1840 it was only 3.89 years, rising to 4.42 years after 1840. This rise is doubtless connected with the accompanying rise in the age of marriage. It will be seen that the degree of disparity in the case of the parents of eminent British persons is nearly double that of the normal average before 1840, with which only it can be compared. The distribution of the different degrees of disparity is not seen from AnseU's tables, but the frequency of high degrees of disparity in age among the parents of eminent British persons is evidently extreme. In Buda-Pesth a table given by Korosi (though not strictly comparable with the present data) shows that if we take men at ages between 26 and 30, covering the most frequent normal age of marriage in only 3 per cent, cases is the discrepancy of age as much as ten years. A similar tendency to unusual disparity of age in the parents is found among other nervously abnormal groups. It is so, for instance, among idiots. Some fifteen years ago, the late Dr. Langdon Down, at my suggestion, kindly went through the notes of one thousand cases of idiots who had been imder his care, and found that in 23 per cent, cases there was a disparity of age of more than ten years in the parents of the idiot child, the 132 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. disparity in many cases being more than twenty-five years. Disparity of age in the parents is also, as Marro has found {La Pubertd, p. 259), unusually prevalent among criminals. Among the parents of North ItaUan school children he found that the normal proportion of parents both belonging to the same stage of development (im- mature, mature, or decadent) is 70 per cent. ; among the parents of North Italian criminals it is only 63 per cent. It has occurred to me as possible that the tendency to disparity of age may be one of the factors in the marked prevalence of boys. As, however, it has only happened that in a comparatively small proportion of cases I have exact data regarding the respective numbers of boys and girls in the families of parents in whom the exact amount of disparity is known, it has not been possible to test this point with any certainty. So far as figures give any indication, they indicate that if disparity is a factor in the sexual proportion of the offspring it can only be so in a very slight degree. On the vs^hole it would appear, so far as the evidence goes, that the fathers of our eminent persons have been predominantly middle-aged and to a marked extent elderly at the time of the distinguished child's birth ; while the mothers have been predominantly at the period of greatest vigour and maturity, and to a somewhat unusual extent elderly. There has been a notable de- ficiency of young fathers, and, still more notably, of young mothers. 133 V. CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. The frequency of constitutional delicacy in infancy and childhood — Tendency of those who were weak in infancy to become robust later — The prevalence of precocity — University education — The frequency of prolonged residence abroad in early life. The first significant fact we encounter in studying the life-histories of these eminent persons is the frequency with which they have shown marked constitutional delicacy in infancy and early life. A group of at least six, — Joanna Bailhe, Hobbes, Keats, Newton, Smart, Charles Wesley, with perhaps Locke and Sterne, — were seven months children, or, at all events, notably premature in birth ; it is a group of very varied and pre- eminent abihty. Not including the above (who were necessarily weakly), at least fourteen are noted as having been very weak at birth, and not expected to live — even given up as dead ; in several cases they were,#on account of supposed imminent death, baptised on the same day. Altogether as 134 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. many as no are mentioned as being extremely delicate during infancy or childhood, and the real number is certainly much greater, for this is a point which must frequently be unknown to the biographers, or be ignored by them. In addition to these, we are told of 103 others (10 per cent.) of our eminent British persons that their health was delicate throughout life, so that we may reasonably assume that in most cases their feeble constitutions were congenital. Thus at the lowest estimate 213 of the individuals on our list, — a very large proportion of those for whom we have data on this question, — were con- genitally of notably feeble physical constitution. Professor A. H. Yoder encountered this fact in the course of his interesting study of the early life of a small group of men of genius {Pedagogical Seminary, October, 1894), but failed to realise its significance. He put it aside as due to a desire on the part of biographers to magnify the mental at the expense of the physical qualities of their subjects. There is no evidence what- ever in support of this assumption. The significance of such early delicacy has, however, already been recognised by other writers. Thus Sir W. G. Simpson {Journal of Mental Science, October, 1893) points out that iUness in children is followed by increased mental development. It may be noted that a tendency to die at birth is also noted among idiots, who often require resuscitation (Matthews Duncan, Sterility in Women, p. 61). CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 135 Although it may fairly be assumed that this proportion, at least, of our eminent persons showed signs of physical inferiority at the be- ginning of life, it must not be assumed that in aU cases such inferiority was marked through- out Hfe. The reverse of this is notably the case in many instances. This is not indeed absolutely proved by longevity, frequently noted in such cases, for men of genius have sometimes lived to an advanced age though all their lives suffering from feeble health. But there is a large group of cases (probably much larger than actually appears), in which the delicate infant develops into a youth or a man of quite exceptional physical health and vigor. Bruce, the traveller, is a tjrpical example. Very delicate in early life, he developed into a man of huge proportions, athletic power and iron constitution. Jeremy Bentham, very weak and delicate in childhood, became healthy and robust and lived to 84 ; Burke, weak and always ailing in early life, was tall and vigorous at 27 ; Constable, not expected to live at birth, became a strong and healthy boy ; Dickens, a puny and sickly child, was fuU of strength and energy at the age of 12 ; Gait, a deUcate and sensitive child, developed Herculean proportions and energy ; Hobbes, very weak in early life, went on gaining strength throughout 136 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. life and died at 8i ; Lord Stowell, with a very feeble constitution in early life, became robust and died at 91. It would be easy to multiply examples, though the early feebleness of the future man of robust constitution must often have been forgotten or ignored, and it is probable that this course of development is not without significance. I have noted that in a very large number of cases one or both parents died soon after the birth of their eminent child. One small but eminent group, — including Blackstone, Chatterton, Cowley, Newton, Adam Smith, and Swift, — had lost their fathers before birth. We may trace here the frequent presence of inherited delicacy of con- stitution. The chief feature in the childhood of persons of eminent intellectual ability brought out by the present data is their precocity. This has indeed been emphasized by previous inquirers into the psychology of genius, but its prevalence is very clearly shown by the present investigation. It has certainly to be said that the definition of " precocity " requires a little more careful consideration than it sometimes receives at the hands of those who have inquired into it, and that when we have carefully defined what we mean by "precocity" it is its absence rather CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 137 than its presence which ought to astonish us in men of genius.* Judging from the data before us, there are at least three courses open to a child who is destined eventually to display pre-eminent intellectual ability. He may (i) show extraordinary aptitude for acquiring the ordinary subjects of school study ; he may (2), on the other hand, show only average, and even much less than average, aptitude for ordinary school studies, but be at the same time engrossed in following up his own preferred lines of study or thinking ; he may, once more (3), be marked in early life solely by physical energy, by his activity in games or mischief, or even by his brutality, the physical energy being sooner or later transformed into intellectual energy. It is those of the first group, those who display an extraordinary aptitude for ordinary school learning, who create most astonishment and are chiefly referred to as proving the " precocity " of genius. There can be no doubt whatever that even in the very highest genius such extraordinary aptitude at a very early age is not infrequently observed. It must also be * For a summary of investigations into the precocity of genius, see A. F. Chamberlain, The Child, pp. 42-6. Cf. also an article by Prof. Sully on "Genius and Precocity," in the Nineteenth Century, June 1886, and another by Prof. J. Jastrow (Journal of Education, July, 1888) showing that precocity is more marked among persons of transcendent genius than among the merely eminent. 138 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. said that it occurs in children who, after school or college hfe is over, or even earlier, display no independent intellectual energy whatever. It is probable that here we really have two classes of cases simulating uniformity. In one class we have an exquisitely organized and sensitive mental mechanism which assimilates whatever is presented to it, and with development ever seeks more complicated problems to grapple with. In the other class we merely have a sponge- like mental receptivity, without any corresponding degree of aptitude for intellectual organization, so that when the period of mental receptivity is over no further development takes place. The second group, comprising those children who are mostly indifferent to ordinary school learning but are absorbed in their own lines of thought, certainly contains a very large number of individuals destined to attain intellectual eminence. They by no means impress people by their " precocity " ; Scott, occupied in building up romances, was a " dunce " ; Hume, the youthful thinker, was described by his mother as " uncom- mon weak-minded." Yet the individuals of this group are often in reality far more "precocious," further advanced along the line of their future activities, than the children of the first group. It is true that they may be divided into two CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 139 classes, those who from the first have divined the line of their later advance, and those who are only restlessly searching and exploring ; but both alike have really entered on the path of their future progress. The third group, including those children who are only noted for their physical energy, is the smallest. In these cases some powerful external impression, — a severe illness, an emotional shock, contact with some person of intellectual eminence, — ^serves to divert the physi- cal energy into mental channels. In those fields of eminence in which moral qualities and force of character count for much, such as statesmanship and generalship, this course of development seems to be a favourable one, but in more purely intellectual fields it scarcely seems to lead very often to the finest results. On the whole, it is evident that " precocity " is not a very valuable or precise conception as applied to persons of intellectual eminence. The conception of physical precocity is fairly exact and definite. It indicates an earher than average attainment of the ultimate growth of maturity. But we are by no means warranted in asserting that the man of intellectual abihty reaches his full growth and maturity earlier than the average man. And even when asj__a child he is compared with other children, his marked superiority along certain hues may HO A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. be more than balanced by his apparent in- feriority along other lines. It is no doubt true thatj in a vague use of the word, genius is very often indeed " precocious " ; but it is evident that this statement is almost meaningless unless we use the word " precocity " in a carefully defined manner: It would be better if we asserted that genius is in a large number of cases mentally abnormal from the first, and if we were to seek to inquire precisely wherein that mental abnor- mality consisted. With these preliminary remarks we may proceed to note the prevalence among British persons of genius of the undefined con- ditions commonly termed " precocity." It is certainly very considerable. Although we have to make allowance for ignorance in a large proportion of cases, and for neglect to mention the fact in many more cases, the national biographers note that 292 of the 1,030 eminent persons on our list may in one sense or another be termed precocious, and only 44 are mentioned as not precocious. Many of the latter belong to the second group, as defined above, — those who are already absorbed in their own lines of mental activity, — and are really just as "precocious" as the others ; thus Cardinal Wiseman as a boy was " dull and stupid, always reading and think- ing " ; Byron showed no aptitude for school CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 141 work, but was absorbed in romance, and Landor, though not regarded as precocious, was already preparing for his future literary career. In a small but interesting group of cases, which must be mentioned separately, the mental development is first retarded and then accelerated ; thus Chatterton up to the age of six and a half was, said his mother, " little better than an absolute fool," then he fell in love with the illuminated capitals of an old foUo, at seven was remarkable for brightness, and at ten was writing poems ; Gold- smith, again, was a stupid child, but before he could write legibly he was fond of poetry and rhyming, and a little later he was regarded as a clever boy ; while Fanny Burney did not know her letters at eight, but at ten was writing stories and poems. Probably the greatest prodigies of infant pre- cocity among these eminent persons were Cowley, Sir W. R. Hamilton, Wren, and Thomas Young, three of these, it will be seen, being men of the first order of genius. J. Barry and ThirlwaU were also notable prodigies, and it would be easy to name a large number of others whose youthful proficiency in learning was of extremely unusual character. While, however, this is undoubtedly the case, it scarcely appears that any actual achievements of note date from early youth. It 142 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. is only in mathematics, and to some extent in poetry, that originahty may be attained at an early age, but even then it is very rare (Newton and Keats are examples), and is not notable until adolescence is completed. ' ; The very marked prevalence of an early bent towards those lines of achievement in which success is eventually to be won is indicated by the fact that in those fields in which such bent is most easily perceived it is most frequently found. It is marked among the musicians, and would doubt- less be still more evident if it were not that our knowledge concerning British composers is very incomplete. It is specially notable in the case of artists. It is reported of not less than 40 out of 64 that in art they were "precocious"; only four are noted as not being specially precocious. A certain proportion of the eminent persons on our list have followed the third course of early development as defined above, that is to say, they have been merely noted for physical energy in youth. Sir Joseph Banks was very fond of play till 14, when he was suddenly struck by the beauty of a lane ; Isaac Barrow was chiefly noted for fighting at school ; Chalmers was full of physical activity, but his intellect awoke late ; Thomas Cromwell was a ruffian in youth ; Thur- low, even at college, was idle and insubordinate ; CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 143 Murchison was a mischievbus boy, full of animal spirits, and was not interested in science till the age of 32 ; Perkins was reckless and drunken till his conversion. It can scarcely be said than any of these remarkable men, not even Barrow, achieved very great original distinction in purely intellectual fields. In order to go far, it is evidently desirable to start early. The influence of education on men of genius is an interesting subject for investigation. It is, however, best studied by considering in detail the history of individual cases ; generalized statements cannot be expected to throw much light on it. I have made no exact notes concerning the school education of the eminent persons at present under consideration ; it is evident that as a rule they received the ordinary school edu- cation of children of their class, and very few were, on account of poverty or social class, shut out from school education. A small but notable proportion were educated at home, being debarred from school-life by feeble health ; a few, also (like J. S. Mill), were specially educated by an intellectual father or mother. The fact of university education has been very carefully noted by the national biographers, and it is possible to form a fairly exact notion of the proportion of eminent British men who have 144 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. enjoyed this advantage. This proportion is de- cidedly large. The majority (53 per cent.) have, in fact, been at some university. Oxford stands easily at the head ; 41 per cent, of those who have had a university education received it at Oxford, and only 33 per cent, at Cambridge. An inter- esting point is observed here ; the respective influences of Oxford and Cambridge are due to geographical considerations ; there is a kind of educational watershed between Oxford and Cam- bridge, running north and south, and so placed that Northamptonshire is on the eastern side. Cambridge drains the east coast, including the important East Anglian district and the greater part of Yorkshire, whilst Oxford drains the whole of the rest of England as well as Wales. This at once accounts both for the greater number of eminent men who have been at Oxford and for the special characteristics of the two universities, due to the districts that have fed them, the more literary character of Oxford, the more scientific character of Cambridge. The Scotch universities are responsible for 14 per cent, of our eminent men. Trinity College, Dublin, shows 5 per cent. The remaining 4 per cent, have studied at one or more foreign universities. Paris (the Sorbonne) stands at the head of the foreign universities, having attracted as many English students as CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 145 all the other European universities put together. This is doubtless mainly due to the fact that Paris was the unquestioned intellectual centre of Europe throughout the long period of the Middle Ages, though the intimate relations between England and France may also have had their influence. With the revival of learning Italian universities became attractive, and Padua long retained its pre-eminence as a centre of medical study. During the seventeenth century the Dutch universities, Leyden and Utrecht, began to attract Enghsh students, and continued to do so to some extent throughout the greater part of the eighteenth century. It was not until the nineteenth century that English students sought out the German universities. Douai might perhaps have been included in the Ust as the chief substitute for university education for the eminent English Catholics who have appeared since the Refor- mation. Stated somewhat more precisely, it may be said that of our 975 eminent men, 217 were at Oxford (232 if we include those who had also been at some other university) ; 177 were at Cambridge (191 if we include those who had also been elsewhere) ; 76 came from Scotch universities (Edinburgh 28, Glasgow 21, St. Andrews 16, Aberdeen 11) ; from Trinity College, 10 146 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Dublin, have come 27 men ; 23 (or 47 if we include those who had previously been at some British university) have been to one or more foreign universities (Paris 23, Leyden 9, Padua 6, Utrecht 3, Louvain 3, Gottingen 2, Bonn 2, Heidelberg 2, etc.)- It may be interesting to compare these results with those obtained by Mr. Maclean in his study of nineteenth century British men of abihty. He found that among some 3,000 eminent men, 1,132, or 37 per cent., are recorded as having had an English, Scotch or Irish university education. Of these 1,132, 37 per cent, were at Oxford, 33 per cent, at Cambridge, 21 per cent, at Scotch universities, 7 per cent, at Dublin, and the small remainder were scattered among various modern institutions. It will be seen that university education plays a comparatively small part in this group. This may be in part due to the lower standard of eminence, but it may also be due to the wide dissemination of the sources of knowledge. In no previous century would so encyclopaedic a thinker as Herbert Spencer have been able to ignore absolutely the advantages of university centres. In America also, as might be expected, a college education has not been received by the majority of able men. Thus Prof. E. Dexter ("High Grade Men in College and Out," Popular Science Monthly, March, 1903) shows that not more than 3,237 out of 8,602 eminent Americans of the nineteenth century (or 37 per cent., exactly the same proportion as Mr. Maclean found in Great Britain) are College graduates ; those who reach a high grade of scholarship are, however, more likely to become eminent than those of low grade. CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 147 While the fact of university education is easily ascertained, it is less easy to define its precise significance. The majority of our men of pre-eminent intellectual abiUty have been at a university ; but it would be surprising were it otherwise, considering that the majority of these men belong to the class which in ordinary course receives a university education. It would be more to the point if we knew exactly what influence the universities had exerted, but on this our present investigation throws httle hght. In a considerable number of cases, at least, the uni- versity exerted no favourable influence whatever, the eminent man subsequently declaring that the years he spent there were the most unprofitable of his hfe ; this was so even in the case of Gibbon, whose residence at Oxford might have been sup- posed to be very beneficial, for at the age of 14 he had already been drawn toward the subject of his life task. In a large number of cases, again, the eminent man left the university with- out a degree, and in not a few cases he was ex- pelled. It is evident, however, on the whole, that university hfe has not been unfavourable to the development of intellectual abihty, and that while our eminent men do not appear to have been usually subjected to any severe edu- cational disciphne they have been in a good 10* 148 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. position to enjoy the best educational advantages of their land and time. Professor Sully in a study of the influence of education on genius, with special reference to men and women of letters (" The Education of Genius," English Illustrated Magazine, January, 1891), had already reached conclusions in harmony with those here set forth : "It cannot be said that the boys who afterwards proved themselves to have been the most highly gifted shone with much lustre at school, or found themselves in happy harmony with their school environment. The record of the doings of genius at college is not greatly different. No doubt a number of the ablest men have won university distinctions. In a few cases, indeed, a thoroughly original man has carried everything before him. At the same time it may safely be said that a very smaU proportion of the men of genius who have visited our universities have presaged their after fame by high academic distinction. Thus it has been computed that, though Cambridge has been rich in poets, only four appear in her honours lists. (See Article on " Senior Wranglers," Cornhill Magazine, vol. 45, p. 225) In many cases we have too clear signs of a disposition to rebel against the discipline and routine of college Ufe We find further that more than one distinguished men have expressed in later life their low estimate of university training. The conclusion that seems to be forced on us by the study of the Uves of men of letters is that they owe a remarkably small proportion of their learning to the established machinery of instruction." If this is not a very decisive result to CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 149 reachj there is another less recognized method of educational development which occurs so frequently that I am disposed to attach very decided significance to it. I refer to residence in a foreign country during early life. The eminent persons under consideration have indeed spent a very large portion of their whole lives abroad, whether from inclination, duty, or ne- cessity (persecution or exile), and it might be interesting to ascertain the average period of life spent by a British man of genius in his own country. I have not attempted to do this, but I have invariably noted the cases in which a lengthened stay abroad has occurred during the formative years of childhood or youth. I have seldom knowingly included any period of less than a year ; in a few cases I have included lengthened stays abroad which were made about the age of 30, but in these cases those periods of foreign residence exerted an unquestionable formative influence. I have excluded soldiers and sailors altogether (as well as explorers), for in their case absence from England at a very early age has been an almost invariable and in- evitable incident in their lives, and has not always been of a kind conducive to intellectual development. Nor have I included the very numerous cases in which transference from one ISO A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. part of the British Islands to another has sufficed to exert a stimulating influence of the greatest importance. With these exceptions, we find that as many as 371 of the eminent persons on our list (nearly as large a proportion as received a university education), during early life, and in all but a few cases before the age of 30, have spent abroad periods which range from about a year, and in very many cases have extended over seven years, up to extreme cases, like that of Caxton, who went to Bruges in early life and stayed there for 30 years ; or Buchanan, who went to France at the age of 14 and was abroad for nearly 40 years. It is natural that France should be the country most frequently mentioned as the place of residence, but France is closely followed by other countries, and a familiarity with many lands, including even very remote and scarcely accessible countries, is often indicated. It may further be noted that this tendency to an association between high intellectual ability and early familiarity with foreign lands is by no means a comparatively recent tendency. It exists from the first ; the earliest personage on our list, St. Patrick, was kidnapped in Scotland at the age of 16, and conveyed over to Ireland ; it seems, indeed, that in the nineteenth century the tendency became less marked, yielding to the CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 151 average modern Englishman's hasty and unprofit- able method of travelling. In any case, however, it is evident that there has been a very marked tendency among these men of pre-eminent abiUty to familiarize themselves in the most serious spirit with every aspect of nature and life. It is equally marked among the men of every group, among poets and statesmen, artists and divines. It is not least marked in the case of men of science from the days of Ray onwards ; if it had not been for the five years on the Beagle we should scarcely have had a Darwin, and Lyell's work was avowedly founded on his constant foreign tours. In a notable number of cases this element comes in at the earhest period of life, the eminent person having been born abroad and spent his childhood there.* The presence of so large a number of our eminent men at a university may be in considerable measure merely the accident of their social position. The persistence with which men of the first order of intellect have sought out and studied unfamiliar aspects of life and nature, or have profited by such aspects when presented by circumstances, indicates a more active and personal factor in the evolution of genius. * It may be noted that at least twelve of our eminent persons — seemingly a large proportion — belonged on one side or the other to West Indian families, whether or not they were bom in the West Indies. 152 VI. MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. Celibacy — Average age at marriage — Tendency to marry late — Age of eminent women at marriage — Apparently a greater tendency to celibacy among persons of ability than among the ordinary population — Fertility of marriage — Fertility and sterility of eminent persons alike pronounced — Average size of families — Proportion of children of each sex. We have some information concerning the status as regards marriage of g88 of the eminent persons on our list. Of these, 79, being Catholic priests or monks (twelve of them since the Reformation), were vowed celibates.* Of the others, 177 never married. We thus find that 25.9 per cent, never married, or, if we exclude the vowed cehbates, 19.4 per cent. It must of course be remembered that a certain though not considerable proportion of the unmarried were under fifty at death, and some of these would certainly have married had they survived. It * One or two priests who belonged to the early centuries before the celibacy of ecclesiastics was firmly established and who consequently married, are not of course included. MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 153 may be added that of the women considered separately, about two-thirds were married, though several of them (especially actresses) who were mimarried formed liaisons of a more or less public character and in a few cases had several children. It must not be supposed that all these eminent men who lived long lives in cehbacy were always so absorbed in intellectual pursuits that the idea of matrimony never occurred to them. This was not the case. Thus we are told of Dalton, that the idea had crossed his mind, but he put it aside because, he said, he " never had time." In several cases, as in that of Cowley, the eminent man appears really to have been in love, but was too shy to avow this fact to the object of his affections. Reynolds is supposed only once to have been in love, with Angelica Kauffmann ; the lady waited long and patiently for a declaration, but none arrived, and she finally married another ; Re5molds does not appear to have been over- much distressed, and they remained good friends. These cases seem to be fairly typical of a certain group of the celibates in our list ; a passionate devotion to intellectual pursuits seems often to be associated with a lack of passion in the ordinary relationships of life. 154 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. while excessive shyness really betrays also a feebleness of the emotional impulse. In the case of many poets who have adored their mis- tresses with passionate fervour in verse it would appear that there has often been no accom- panying fervour in the love-making of real life. Sir Philip Sidney, even though he was counted the paragon of his time, with all his sweet sonnets never shook the virtue of his Stella (Lady Pene- lope Rich), who yet eloped some years later with another man who was not a poet. Even in many cases in which marriage occurs, it is easy to see that the relationship was rooted in the man's intellectual passion. The average age at marriage among the 503 men on the list concerning whom I have infor- mation on this point is 31.1 years, the most frequent age being 26 years. The distribution is as follows : Age ... . Under 20 20 — 2S- 30- 35- 40— 45- 50- 55- No. of cases Per cent. . . 16 3 88 17 139 27 IIO 22 66 IS 43 8 28 S 9 1-7 4 •7 I have ascertained the ages at marriage of the fathers of the eminent persons on my list (not including the fathers who are themselves of MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. iSS sufficient eminence to be included in the list) in 73 cases ; they are distributed as follows : — Under 20 20 — 2S- 30— 35- 40— 4S- 50- 3 7 30 18 9 4 I I The most frequent age of marriage of the fathers is 25, but the average is 30 years. It would thus appear that while both British men of genius and their fathers tend to marry at an abnormally late period, the former marry, if anything, even later than their fathers. If, however, in the 54 cases in which data are forthcoming we compare the age at marriage of the individual man of genius with that of his (not eminent or less eminent) father the results are not quite concordant. It is found that five married at the same age as their fathers ; while 29 were younger and only 20 older. The deviations from the paternal example are often very considerable in either direction, and it can scarcely be said that the data before us suffice for the conclusion that our British men of genius have married later than their fathers. If we compare the distribution of the frequency of the marriage-age among British men of genius and their fathers with the general population, the contrast is 156 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. very striking. In England generally 57 per cent, of the men who marry before the age of 30 marry between the ages of 20 and 25, a larger proportion than in any other European country. The curve for the British men of genius much more nearly resembles that for the general population in Sweden or in France, where of all European countries marriage is latest. It is, however, of more significance to compare British men of genius with the professional classes of their own land, avoiding also the fallacy of including second or subsequent marriages. Ansell found that the average age of marriage for clerical; legal and medical bechelors in the nineteenth century before 1840 was about 28 years. There is thus a small but distinct delay in the age of marriage among men of genius, a delay which, would be stiU more marked if we can assume that the gradual ten- dency, noted by Ansell as in progress during the nineteenth century, for marriage to take place later among the professional classes, may be pushed back to the previous century. It would be further marked, if the comparison were made more strictly between professional class men of genius and ordinary professional class men, by omitting from the men of genius those of aristocratic and plebeian class, among both of whom I find that marriage has frequently taken place very early. While not disputing the statement of Ansell that during the nineteenth century there was a progressive tendency among the , professional classes for marriage to take place at a later age, I am by no means convinced that we can push this tendency back and assert that in earlier centuries marriage among the same classes took place very early. This seems highly improbable. MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 157 It is much more likely that while there have been fluctu- ations from time to time, the age of marriage has not on the whole greatly changed, so far as the professional classes are concerned, for many centuries past. I am confirmed in this opinion by an examination of the age of marriage which prevailed in various branches of my own ancestry (belonging to the middle and upper middle class) during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries ; the general average was 29, and taking the seventeenth century figures separately (though here the numbers are few) it was decidedly higher. The average age, it will be seen, lies between that which I have found for the fathers of our eminent British persons and that found by Ansell for the British professional classes generally before 1840. I find in the marriage " allegations " of the Archdeacon of Essex for the years 1791-97, where the age " about " is given, that the average for 20 bachelors is 26 years. The exact social class is not, however, obvious. It remains probable that when we take a sufficiently high standard of intellectual eminence the age of marriage is somewhat later than that of the professional classes generally, but it would scarcely appear that the difference is considerable. The married women among the British people of intellectual eminence concerning whom we have definite information, form but a small group of 26 persons, a group too small to generalise about. Their average age at marriage was 28 years, and the most frequent 158 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. ages of marriage were 22 and 40. bution is as follows : — The distri- Age . . Under 20 20- 25— 30- 35- 40- Number of Persons 3 9 4 3 3 4 Although the numbers are so small, it is probably nbt an accident that the most frequent ages of marriage should be 22 and 40 years. If we take into account the ages before 30 only, we note a marked tendency to early marriage more marked than among English women of the professional classes, more marked even than among the general population. But after the age of 24 there is a sudden and extra- ordinary fall, the ages of 26 and 27 are un- represented altogether, and, stiU more remark- able, the shght rise which eventually takes place is postponed to the ages of 40 and 41, towards the end of sexual hfe. The interpretation of this curious curve is, however, fairly obvious. The claims of the reproductive and domestic life are in women too preponderant and imperious to be easily conciliated with the claims of a hfe of intellec- tual laboiir. The women who marry at the MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 159 period of greatest general and sexual activity, between 25 and 30, tend either to have their intellectual activities stifled, or else to be seriously handicapped in attaining eminence. The women, on the other hand, who have either married v6ry early and then escaped from, or found a modus vivendi with, domestic and procreative claims, or else have been able to postpone the sexual life and its dominating claims until comparatively late in life, enjoy a very great advantage in attaining intellectual eminence. Thus it is that among British women of genius very few marriages take place during the period of great reproductive energy ; the large majority of such marriages fall outside the period between 23 and 34 years of age. In the majority of cases marriage took place before this period, the relationship, from one reason or another, being very often dissolved not long afterwards ; but in a very considerable proportion of cases, marriage never took place until after this period. Thus, Fanny Burney married at 41, Mrs. Browning at 40, Charlotte Bronte at 38, while George EHot's relationship with Lewes was formed at about the age of 36 ; these names include the most eminent English women of letters. It would thus appear that there is a ten- i6o A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. dency for the years of greatest reproductive ac- tivity to be reserved for intellectual development, by accelerating or retarding the disturbing emotional and practical influences of real life. This tendency might still be beneficial, even when the best work was not actually accom- plished until after a late marriage. Ansell found the age of marriage of English spinsters belonging to the professional classes, previous to 1840, to be 24.75 years, while after 1840 it was 25.53. ^'^s- Sidgwick found the age of marriage of the , sisters of Oxford and Cambridge women students, in exact agree- ment with Ansell, to be 25.53 years, while the age of marriage of the students themselves was 26.70. Among the general population in England the chief age of marriage for women is between 20 and 25. At the end of the eighteenth century the average age (" about ") of 19 spinsters in the marriage allegations of the court of the Archdeacon of Essex was 23.5 years. We have now to consider more minutely the status as regards marriage of our British men and women of eminent intellectual ability. When we eliminate the 79 individuals who had taken vows of celibacy and the 177 others who are definitely known not to have married, we have 774. Of these, 732 are definitely known to have married, while the remaining 42 are doubtful. It is probable that the doubtful may be equally divided between the married and MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. i6i the unmarried. We cannot assume that the same proportion of married and unmarried prevails among them as among the known group, for it would appear that in many cases the omission of the mention of marriage is to be regarded as a tacit statement on the biogra- pher's part that the subject was not married. If this is admitted we must conclude that in the whole body of 1,030 persons, including the vowed cehbates, 277 never married, that is to say a proportion of 26.8 per cent. If we omit the vowed cehbates, the proportion is reduced to 20 per cent. If we leave out of account alike the vowed celibate group and the small dubious group, and con- sider only those remaining persons, 909 in number, of whom we have definite knowledge, the percentage of those who never married is found to be 19.4. If we consider separately the most recent group, i.e., those whose names are contained in the Supplement to the Dictionary of National Biography, the results are not widely different ; the proportion of the unmarried being in the ratio of nearly 18 per cent. It is natural to ask the question whether the tendency to remain unmarried is greater among our men of ability than among the general population. It is, however, obviously difficult to answer the question with any precision, because we must of course compare the men II i62 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. of ability with normal persons not only of the same class but the same period. A consideration of the results seems to suggest that there is a somewhat greater tendency to celibacy among men belonging to the very highest class of genius than there is among the rank and file of able men, but that so far as the latter are concerned the tendency to celibacy is not notably greater than aiftong the ordinary population of the same social class. We see that the most recent group of our eminent British persons, which probably shows a somewhat lower general level of eminence, also shows a somewhat slighter tendency to celibacy. It is probable that among men of eminent ability the tendency to celibacy has always been slightly, but only slightly, greater than among the general population of the same social class. This conclusion is confirmed by an enquiry made by Professor E. L. Thorndike (" Marriage among Eminent Men," Popular Science Monthly, August, 1902). He sought to ascertain the proportion of married individuals among the 1,000 most eminent men in a biographical compilation of contemporary Americans entitled Who's Who in America. The standard of ability here demanded is necessarily very much lower than that of the persons in my list. It was found that of those who had reached the age of 40, 12 per cent, were celibate, as against 15 per cent, for the most recent group (excluding the women) on my list, nearly aU of whom had far passed the age of 40. For the whole male population over the age of 40, in the United States, Professor Thorndike states, the proportion of celibates is from 11 to 7 per cent, decreasing with age. Of the 753 persons whom we may reasonably MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 163 suppose to have married, 548 are definitely stated to have had children, 113 are definitely stated to have been childless, the remaining 93 are doubtful. If we assume that two- thirds of this doubtful remainder may be included among the fertile group, we may say that ig per cent, of eminent British men and women who married have remained sterile. If, however, we only take into consideration those cases concerning which we have definite informa- tion, we find that the proportion of the sterile is about 17 per cent. This is certainly less than the real proportion for the whole niarried group, for there can be little doubt that in a large number of cases the biographers have made no mention of children simply because there were no children to mention. In many cases, I have been able to verify this statement that the merely negative absence of information meant a positive absence of children, though this is not invariably the case. We may assume that the real proportion of individuals whose marriages were sterile, for the whole of our married group, is more nearly 19 than 17 per cent. If we consider the 55 women separately, we find that one was a vowed celibate, and 19 others remained unmarried, while of the 35 II* i64 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. who were married, 14 certainly had children and 21 apparently had no children. A few of the actresses occupy an uncertain borderland between the married and the unmarried. They have here, however (according to the same rule as has been adopted with the men), been regarded as unmarried, even though they had a recognised family, whenever they were not generally recog- nised as married. The number of sterile persons (like the number of unmarried persons) among our eminent men and women must be regarded as, in all probability, an abnormally large proportion in comparison with the general popu- lation of the same period and class. It must be borne in mind that the figures which have been given do not represent the proportion of fertile and sterile marriages, but the proportion of persons who have proved fertile and sterile in marriage. As many of our eminent persons entered into two or more marriages during life and very frequently only proved fertile in one or in none, it is evident that if we were to consider the ratio of fertile and sterile marriages, instead of the ratio of fertile and sterile persons in marriage, the prevalence of sterility would be much more marked. Simpson found that the proportion of sterile marriages in two Scotch seafaring and agricultural villages was about 10 per cent., while in the British peerage he found that it was about 16 per cent. (J. Y. Simpson, Obstetric Works, vol. i. pp. 323, et seq.) Professor Karl Pearson, manipulating the data fur- nished by Howard CoUins, has found that during the MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 165 early part of the past century among the middle and upper classes chiefly of British race, or belonging to the United States — a class fairly comparable to those in the present group — the total sterility was about 12 or 13 per cent., rather less than half of this {i.e., about 6 per cent.) being due to what may be termed " natural steriUty," while the remainder {i.e., 6 or y per cent.) must be set down to artificial restraints on reproduction. At the present day in the United States sterility has greatly increased, and Dr. Engelmann finds it to exist in 20 per cent, of marriages in St. Louis and Boston in dis- pensary practice, and in 23 per cent, among the higher classes in private practice, although among the foreign elements in the population the proportion is very much lower. In New Zealand also, at the other side of the world, sterility is at the present day very marked. Here the methods of registration enable us to form an approximate estimate of the proportion of childless marriages among a population of somewhat mixed British race with a high standard of living, and the proportion of marriages in which there is no surviving child at the father's death is about 16 per cent. ; but it must be borne in mind that we have to allow for the early death of the children in some cases, ^as well as for the early death of the father. We Jiave also to remember that this increase of sterility is a modern phenomenon, and that the artificial restraint of repro- duction to which it is in large part, if not mainly, due is of recent development. All the indications point to the conclusion that the sterility of our eminent men is greater than that of their contemporaries of the same social class. I may add that among the 62 eminent married men i66 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. on my list who appear in the Supplement to the Dic- tionary of National Biography and therefore constitute the most recent group, the proportion who are sterile appears to be in about the ratio of nearly 20 per cent., which very closely approximates to the general average. In Galton's group of modern British men of science the proportion of sterile marriages was higher ; there were no children in one out of every three cases. It is somewhat remarkable that, although the number of infertile marriages is so large, the average fertility of those marriages which were not barren is by no means small. We have fairly adequate information in the case of 281 of these eminent men. I have not included those cases in which the biographer is only able to say that there were " at least " so many children, nor have I knowingly included the offspring of second or subsequent marriages. Whether the number of children represents gross or net fertiUty, it is, unfortunately, in a very large proportion of instances, quite impossible to say. It is probable that in a certain proportion of cases only the net fertihty, i.e., the number of children who survived infancy and childhood, has been recorded. It is therefore probable that the average number of children in these fertile famiUes, which is 4.8, must be considered as slightly below the real gross fertihty. The average reached is not far from the normal MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 167 average, and very decidedly below that of the families from which the men of genius spring. With regard to the distribution of families of different sizes, the results, as compared with the figures already given, are as foUows : Size of Family Normal Families . Genius-producing Families Families of Men of Genius I 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 12.2 14.7 iS-3 141 II. I 8.6 7.8 6-3 6.9 9-4 10.6 9-4 10. 1 10.4 8.9 6.7 14.2 16.7 10.3 12 "•3 7-4 8.S 4.6 Size of Family . Normal Families Genius-producing Families Families of Men of Genius . 9 ID II 12 13 14 over 14 3-9 2.7 1.4 I.O •5 .2 .1 S-7 4-7 4-9 4.4 2.2 1.9 3-4 S-3 2.1 2.1 •7 2.1 1.0 1.0 Allowing for certain irregularities due to the insufficient number of cases, the interesting point that emerges is the return towards the proportions that prevail in normal families ; it will be seen that in all but a few cases the families of men of genius differ from genius-pro- ducing famihes by approximating to normal famiUes. It must be remembered that in neither of our groups are the data absolutely perfect, but as they stand they confirm the conclusion already suggested that men of genius i68 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. belong to families in which there is a high birth- rate, a flaring up of procreative activity, which in the men of genius themselves subsides towards normal proportions. The families of the men of genius seem to differ chiefly from normal families in showing a greater tendency to variation ; there are more very smaU famihes, there are more very large families. It will be noticed that the families of sizes ranging between three and six, both inclusive, are unduly few. It might be supposed that this is due to the artificial limitation of families, more especially since, in Professor Pearson's opinion, the normal families themselves show a deficiency in those groups probably due to this cause. I am, however, inclined to doubt whether that is so in the case of families of men of genius, although to a small extent it may be so. It is possible that from the present point of view the group may not be homogeneous, but made up in part of men with feeble vitality and a tendency to steriHty, and in part of men with a tendency towards unusual fecundity, thus leading to a deficiency of medium-sized families. The relationship which has been found to exist between our British genius-producing families, and the families which the men of genius themselves produce (i.e., the increased fertility followed in the next genera- MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. 169 tion by diminished fertility), does not represent a novel result. It had already been found by Galton (English Men of Science, p. 38) in his group of modern British men of science. Eliminating sterile marriages he found that the average size of the f amiUes of the men of science was 4.7 children, almost exactly the same size as we have found for the whole group of British men of genius. Galton, however, only took living children into account. There would appear to be a considerable resemblance between the fertility of genius families and of insane families. We see that our eminent British persons be- long to families of probably more than average fertility, that they themselves produce families of probably not more than average size, and with an abnormal prevalence of sterUity. In France, Ball and Regis, confirmed by Marandon de Montyel, appear to have found reason for a similar conclusion regarding the insane. They state that natality is greater among the ascendants of the insane than in normal famihes, but afterwards it is the same as in normal families, while they also note the prevalence of sterihty in the families of the insane. The question, however, needs further investigation (Toulouse, Causes de la Folie, p. gi). In the case of 278 families of our British men of genius it has been possible to ascertain the number of children of each sex. This is found to be over 105 boys to 100 girls, a somewhat higher proportion of boys than has prevailed in Great Britain during the past century, but, in accordance with the results we have reached concerning the size of the famihes of our men I70 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. of genius, very much closer to the normal average than are the sexual proportions pre- vaihng among the families from which the men of genius spring. If, however, I am right in supposing that in a certain proportion of our cases the biographers have stated not the gross fertility, but only the net fertility (or the sur- viving children), we are not entitled to expect so close an approximation to the proportions at birth, since the preponderance of boys begins to vanish immediately after birth. The figures thus suggest that the families of men of genius show the same tendency to excess of boys, which we have already seen to be clearly marked in the case of the families producing men of genius. The data are too few to indicate whether there is any corresponding excess of girls in the families of women of genius. 171 VII. DURATION OF LIFE. The fallacy involved in estimating the longevity of eminent men — The real bearing of the data — Mortality at different ages. It has long been a favourite occupation of popular writers on genius to estimate the ages at which famous men have died, to dilate on their tendency to longevity, and to conclude, or assume, that longevity is the natural result of a life devoted to intellectual avocations. The average age for dif- ferent groups, found by a number of different inqviirers, varies between sixty-four and seventy- one years. One writer, who finds this highest age for certain groups of eminent men of the nine- teenth century, argues that here we have a test from which there is no appeal, proving the pre- eminence of the nineteenth century over previous centuries, and its freedom from " degeneration." It did not occur to this inquirer to ask at what age the famous men of earlier centuries died. I have done so in the case of a small group of ten eminent 172 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. men on my list, dying between the fourth and the end of the thirteenth centuries — including, I believe, nearly all those in my list of whose dates we have fairly definite information during this period — and I find that their average age is exactly seventy-four years. So that, if this test means anything at all, the freedom of the nine- teenth century from " degeneration " is by no means proved. In reality, however, it means nothing. If genius were recognisable at birth there would be some interest in tracing the course of its death- rate. But it must always be remembered that when we are dealing with men of genius, we are really dealing with famous men of genius, and that though genius may be born, fame is made — in most fields very slowly made. Among poets, it has generally been found, longevity is less marked than among other groups of eminent men, and the reason is simple. The qualities that the poet requires often develop early ; his art is a comparatively easy one to acquire and exercise, while its products are imperishable and of so widely appreciated a character that even a few lines may serve to gain immortality. The case of the poet is, therefore, somewhat exceptional, though even among poets only a few attain per- fection at an early age. In nearly every other DURATION OF LIFE. 173 field the man of genius must necessarily take a long period to acquire the full possession of his powers, and a still longer period to impress his fellowmen with the sense of his powers, thus attaining eminence. In the case of the lawyer, for instance, the path of success is hemmed in by tradition and routine, every triumph is only wit- nessed by a small number of persons, and passes away without adequate record ; only by a long succession of achievements through many years can the lawyer hope to acquire the fame neces- sary for supreme eminence, and it is not surpris- ing that of the eminent lawyers on my hst only five were under sixty at death. Much the same is true, though in a slightly less marked degree, of statesmen, divines and actors. It is, therefore, somewhat an idle task to pile up records of the longevity of eminent men of genius. They live a long time for the excellent resison that they must five a long time or they will never become eminent. It is doubtless true that men of genius, — mostly belonging to the well-to-do classes, and possessing the energy and usually the opportunities necessary to foUow intellectual ends of a comparatively impersonal and disinterested character, — are in a far more favourable position for living to an advanced age than the crowds who struggle more or less 174 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. desperately for the gratification of personal greeds and ambitions, which, neither in the pursuit nor the attainment are conducive to peaceful and wholesome living. This may well be believed, but it is hardly demonstrated by the longevity of eminent men. At the same time it is of some interest to note the ages of the eminent persons on our list at death. Though the facts may have little sig- nificance in themselves, they have a bearing on many of the other data here recorded. Excluding women, and including only those men whose dates are considered by the national biographers to be unquestionable, the ages of eminent British men at death range from Chatterton the poet, at seventeen, to Sir A. T. Cotton the man of science, at ninety-six. They are distributed as foUows in five-year age-periods : — Age at Death . . Men of Genius under 20 I 20 — 24 2 25—29 6 30—34 14 35—39 IS 40—44 32 Age at Death . Men of Genius . 4S— 49 SO SO-S4 SS SS— S9 76 60 — 64 90 6S-69 130 70—74 139 Age at Death . Men of Genius . 7S— 79 100 80—84 65 8S-89 46 90 and over 20 DURATION OF LIFE. 175 If we consider the number for each year sepa- rately, certain points emerge which are disguised by the five-year age-pefiod, though the irregu- larities become frequently marked and inexplic- able. A certain order, however, seems to be maintained. There is scarcely any rise from twenty-seven to thirty-eight, and even at forty- five only three individuals died ; but, on the whole, there is a slow rise after thirty-eight, leading to the first climax at forty-nine, when sixteen individuals died ; this climax is main- tained at a lower level to fifty-three, when there follows a fall to a level scarcely higher than that which prevailed ten and more years earlier. This lasts for three years ; then there is a sudden rise from seven deaths at fifty-six, to twenty-five deaths at fifty-seven, and this second climax is again maintained at a somewhat lower level to the age of sixty-seven, when the highest cUmax is attained, with thirty-four deaths. Thereafter the decline is extremely slow but steady, not becoming accelerated until after eighty. Each climax is sudden, and preceded by a fall. A noteworthy point here seems to be the very low mortaUty between the ages of fifty-three and fifty-seven. It seems to confirm Galton's conclusion, based on somewhat similar data, that a group of men of genius is in part made up of 176 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. persons of unusually feeble constitutions and in part of persons of unusually vigorous constitu- tions. After the first climax at forty-nine the feeble have mostly died out. The vigorous are then in possession of their best powers and work- ing at full pressure ; fifty-seven appears to be a critical age at which exhaustion and collapse are specially liable to occur. The presence of these two classes, — the abnormally weak and the abnormally vigorous, — would be in harmony with the explanation I have already ventured to offer of the deficiency of medium-sized families left by our men of genius. The age of the women at death is ascertainable in fifty-one cases. The average is sHghtly over sixty-two years. As among the men, there would seem to be among them a small group tending to die early. The age-distribution arranged in periods of five years is as follows : Age at Death Women of Genius . 30—34 2 35-39 4 40—44 2 45—49 50—54 2 Age at Death Women of Genius SS-S9 5 60 — 64 4 65-69 7 70—74 4 75-79 4 Age at Death Women of Genius 80—84 8 85-89 4 90 and over 3 177 VIII. PATHOLOGY. Relative ill-health — Consumption — The psychology of consumptives — Gout — Its extreme frequency in men of ability — The possible reasons for the association between gout and ability — Other uric acid diseases — ^Asthma and angina pectoris — Insanity — The question of its significance — Apparent rarity of grave nervous disease — Frequency of minor nervous disorders — / Stammering — Its significance — High-pitched voice — Spasmodic movements — Illegible Handwriting — Short sight — Awkwardness of movement. It has already been noted (p. 134) that at least 10 per cent, of our eminent British persons suffered from a marked degree of ill-health, amounting to more than minor discomfort, during the years of their active Uves. It is of some interest to observe how these persons are distributed among the various chief classes of ability. This distribution appears to be as follows : Soldiers and sailors . 3 per cent Statesmen, etc. / }> )> Men of science II „ „ Lawyers 13 n » Men of letters . '■•■■:■ 15 „ „ 12 178 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Artists . . . .16 per cent. Poets . . . . 16 „ „ Divines . . . . 17 „ „ This marked prevalence of ill-health among divines had already been noted by Galton {Hereditary Genius, pp. 255 et seq.). He analysed the 196 biographies contained in Middleton's BiographiaEvangelica, and came to the conclusion that there is "a frequent correlation between an unusually devout disposition and a weak constitution." He found that over 13 per cent, at least were "certainly invalids," while a large number of the others were ailing. He found also that of the 12 or 13 who were alone stated to be decidedly robust, 5 or 6 were irregular in their youth, while on the other hand only 3 or 4 divines are stated to have been irregular in their youth, who were not also men of notably robust constitutions. i In a large proportion of cases no reference is made by the national biographers to the diseases from which their subjects suffered, nor to the ' general state of health. This, however, we could scarcely expect to find, except in those cases in which the state of health had an obvious influence on the life and work of the eminent person. In most of these exceptional cases it is probable that the biographers have duly called attention to the facts, and though the information thus attained is not always precise, — in part owing to the imperfection of the knowledge PATHOLOGY. 179 transmitted, in part to the medical ignorance of the biographers,* and in part to the dehberate vagueness of their reference to a " painful malady," etc.,— it enables us to reach some very instructive conclusions concerning the patho- logical conditions to which men of genius are most hable. Putting aside the cases of delicate health in childhood, with which I have already dealt in a previous section, the national biographers state the cause of death, or mention serious diseased conditions during life, in some 400 cases. It is natural to find that certain diseased conditions which are very common among the ordinary population are also very common among ttien of pre-eminent intellectual ability. Thus, a lesion of the vessels in the brain (the condition commonly described as paralysis, apoplexy, effusion on the brain, etc.) is a very common cause of death among the general population, and we also find that it is mentioned 44 times by the national biographers. Consumption, also so prevalent among the general population, occurred in at least 40 cases. While many of the consumptive men of genius lived to past middle age, or even reached a fairly *Thus one of the national biographers informs us that a recent Archbishop of Canterbury had an attack of catalepsy, which is a rare and severe form of hysteria ; he probably meant apoplexy. , 12* i8o A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. advanced age, the disease is responsible for the early death of most of the more eminent of those men of genius who died young — of Keats in poetry, of Bonington and Girtin and Beardsley in art, of Purcell (probably) in music. Some appear to have struggled with consumptive tendencies during a fairly long life ; these have usually been men of letters, and have sometimes shown a feverish Uterary activity, their intellec- tual output being perhaps as remarkable for quantity as for quality, as we may observe in Baxter and in J. A. Symonds. But Sterne in Hterature, and Black, Priestley, Clifford and other eminent men of science are to be found among the consumptives. It is evident that the disease by no means stands in the way of any but the very highest intellectual attainments, even if it is not indeed actually favourable to mental activity.* There is, however, a pathological condition which occurs so often, in such extreme forms, and in men of such pre-eminent intellectual ability, * The psychology of the consumptive, — marked by mental exaltation, hyper-excitability, the tendency to form vast plans and to exert feverish activity in carrying them out, with, at all events in the later stages, egoism, indifference, neurasthenia, — has been studied by Maurice LetuUe {Archives Ginirales de Midecine, 1901) > s summary of his study will be found in the British Medical Journal, 4 May, 1901. An interesting sjrmposium on the mental state of the consumptive will also be found in the Archives de Neurologic, Jan. 1903. PATHOLOGY. i8i that it is impossible not to regard it as having a real association with such abihty. I refer to gout. This is by no means a common disease, at all events at the present day. In ordinary English medical practice at the present time, it may safely be said that cases of typical gout seldom form more than one per cent, of the chronic disorders met with. Yet gout is of all diseases that most commonly mentioned by the national biographers ; it is noted as occurring in 53 cases, often in very severe forms. We have, indeed, to bear in mind that gout has been recognized for a long time, and that it is more- over a disease of good reputation. Yet, even if we assume that it has been noted in every case in which it occurs among our 1,030 eminent persons (an altogether absurd assumption to make), we should still have to recognize its presence in five per cent, cases. Moreover, the eminence of these gouty subjects is as notable as their number. They include Milton, Harvey, Sydenham, Newton, Gibbon, Fielding, Hunter, Jonhson, Congreve, the Pitts, J. Wesley, Landor, W. R. Hamilton and C. Darwin, while the Bacons were a gouty family. It would probably be impossible to match the group of gouty men of genius, for varied and pre-eminent intellectual abihty, by any combination of non-gouty indi- i82 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. viduals on our list. It may be added that these gouty men of genius have frequently been eccentric, often very irascible, — " choleric " is the term applied by their contemporaries, — and occa- sionally insane. As a group, they are certainly very unlike the group of eminent consumptives. These latter, with their febrile activities, their restless versatility, their quick sensitiveness to impressions, often appear the very type of genius, but it is a somewhat feminine order of genius. The genius of the gouty group is emphatically masculine, profoundly original ; these men show a massive and patient energy which proceeds "without rest," it may be, but also "without haste," until it has dominated its task and solved its problem. Sydenham, the greatest of EngUsh physicians, who suffered from gout for thirty-four years, and wrote an unsurpassed description of its S5nnptoms, said in his treatise, De Podagra, that "it may be some consolation to those sufferers from the disease who, hke myself and others, are only modestly endowed with fortune and intellectual gifts, to know that great kings, princes, generals, admirals, philosophers and many more of like eminence have suffered from the same complaint, and ultimately died of it. In a word, gout, unlike any other disease, kills more rich men than poor, more wise than simple." And another ancient writer, the Jesuit, Father Balde, who in 1661 wrote a work which PATHOLOGY. 183 he called Solatium Podagricorum, called gout Dominus morborum et morbus dominorum. I may remark that a much earlier ancient, Aretseus, indicates the superior intelligence of the gouty in his statement that they are specially skilful in the know- ledge of the drugs that suit them. In more recent times a long series of physicians have testified to the intellectual eminence of their gouty patients. CuUen said that gout especially affected " men of large heads "; Watson stated that gout is " peculiarly incidental to men of cultivated mind and intellectual distinction." Sir Spencer Wells believes that, in the absence of here- ditary predisposition, gout is not easy to produce except "in men endowed with a highly organised condition of the nervous system," and again remarks (Practical Observations on Gout, 1856, p. 23), in reference to states- men, " those who are known to be subject to gout are among the most distinguished for an ancestry rendered illustrious by ' high thoughts and noble deeds,' for their own keen intelligence, for the assistance that they have afforded to improvements in arts, science and agriculture, and for the manner in which they have led the spirit of the age. . . I never met with a real case of gout, in other classes of the community, in a person not remarkable for mental activity, unless the tendency to gout was clearly inherited." This association of abihty and gout cannot be a fortuitous coincidence. I have elsewhere suggested (Papular Science Monthly, July, 1901) that the secret of the association may possibly to some extent lie in the special pathological peculiarities of gout. It is liable to occur in robust, well-nourished individuals. It acts in such a way that the poison is sometimes in i84 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. the blood, and sometimes in the joints. Thus not only is the poison itself probably an irritant and stimulant to the nervous system, but even its fluctuations may be mentally beneficial. When it is in the victim's blood his brain becomes abnormally overclouded, if not intoxi-' cated ; when it is in his joints his mind becomes ab- normally clear and vigorous. There is thus a well- marked mental periodicity ; the man liable to attacks of gout is able to view the world from two entirely different points of view ; he has, as it were, two brains at his disposal ; in the transition from one state to another he is constantly receiving new inspirations, and constantly forced to gloomy and severe self-criticism. His mind thus attains a greater mental vigour and acuteness than the more equable mind of the non-gouty subject, though the latter is doubtless much more useful for the ordinary purposes of life, for the gouty subject is too much the victim of his own constitutional state to be always a reliable guide in the conduct of affairs. It is, however, possible only to speak tentatively of the nature of the pathological relationship between genius and gout, because the true nature of gout itself is not yet definitely known. Some years ago the theory that gout is caused by uric acid was very vigorously promulgated by Garrod and others, and very widely accepted ; this theory, however, no longer receives such wide acceptance, and there is a tendency to regard the uric acid produced in gout as a symptom rather than a cause. According to another view which has lately been maintained by Woods Hutchinson in a very able discussion of this question (" The meaning of Uric Acid and the Urates," Lancet, 31 January, 1903), gout is certainly a toxaemia, but chiefly of intestinal origin PATHOLOGY. 185 (the uric acid produced by the disease being com- paratively harmless), whence it is that the drugs good in gout are such as either prevent intestinal fermentation or absorb its products. This theory does not, however, clearly answer the question why it is that some persons and not others are liable to gout. A theory which has been upheld by a long series of distinguished clinical ph3reicians regards gout as primarily and pre-eminently a neurosis ; this was the belief of Stahl, Cullen, Laycock, Dyce Duckworth (Dyce Duckworth, " A Plea for the Neurotic Theory of Gout," Brain, April, 1880). I should be going beyond my proper province if I were to state that the facts here brought forward may be regarded as an argument in favour of the existence of a neurotic element in the factors producing gout. That, however, my data confirm the belief in the prevalence of gout among men of high intellectual ability can scarcely be doubted. I have sometimes found that physicians who readily accept a special association between intellectual ability and gout, are inclined to account for it easily by an unduly sedentary life probably associated with excesses in eating and drinking. This explanation cannot be accepted. Many of the most gouty persons on my list have been temperate in eating and drinking to an extreme degree, and while it is true that the gouty have often written much, the general energy, physical and mental, of the gouty may almost be said to be notorious. Sir Spencer Wells, in questioning the influence of sedentary habits, referred to the remarkable activity of gouty statesmen, and more recently Dr. Burney Yeo remarks {British Medical Journal, 15 June, 1901) : " The gouty patients that I have seen have, I should say, in the i86 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. majority of instances, been extremely active and energetic people, and it is often difficult to get them to take sufficient rest." I may note that in a much earlier age Aretseus speaks of a gouty person who, in an interval of the disease, won the race in the Olympiac games. It may be of interest to point out in relation to the connection between genius and gouty conditions, that Marro {La Pubert/, p. 256) has observed a very constant relation between advanced age of parents at conception and lithiasis in the child. We have already seen that there is a marked tendency among some of our men of genius for the parents to be of advanced age at the eminent chUd's conception ; and it is possible that the connection between gout and genius may thus be in part due to a tendency of some of the gout-producing influences to be identical with some of the genius-pro- ducing influences. If this is so we might probably expect to find that the age of the parents of those of our men of genius who belonged pathologically to the lithiasis group would be higher than the general average. I find that the average age of 19 fathers of eminent gouty men is 37.4, and of seven mothers 33.2 years, while the average age of the fathers of eight eminent men who suffered from stone or gravel is 37.2. These averages are slightly, but very shghtly indeed, higher than those for our men of genius generally. It must of course be remembered that the general averages are higher than those for the normal population. It must not, in any case, be supposed that in thus sug- gesting a real connection between gout and genius it is thereby assumed that the latter is in any sense a product of the former. It is easy enough to find severe gout in individuals who are neither rich nor wise, but merely PATHOLOGY. 187 hard-working manual labourers of the most ordinary intelligence. It may well be, however, that, given a highly endowed and robust organism, the gouty poison acts as a real stimulus to intellectual energy, and a real aid to intellectual achievement. Gout is thus merely one of perhaps many exciting causes acting on a fundamental predisposition. If the man of genius is aU the better for a slight ferment of disease, we must not forget that if he is to accomplish much hard work he also requires a robust constitution. It may be added that the other diseases usually described as of the uric acid group are common among our men of genius. Rheumatism, indeed, is not mentioned a large number of times (11), considering its prevalence among the ordinary population. But stone, and closely allied con- ditions, are mentioned 25 times (sometimes in association with gout), and as we may be quite sure that this is a very decided underestimate it is certain that the condition has been remarkably common. There are two disorders, allied to gout and at the same time distinctly neurotic in character, which are decidedly common among our eminent persons, and we must, I beheve, regard them as of considerable significance. I refer to spas- modic asthma and angina pectoris. Asthma is distinctly connected with gouty^ conditions,' and occasionally also^, it alternates with insanity ; i88 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. it is a disorder common in individuals of high nervous temperament.* I have noted it in 14 cases, often as beginning in early life. Angina occurred in about nine cases, certainly a large proportion considering that the disease is one which has only been recognised in quite recent times. It is probable that one or two cases were not true angina but that simulated angina which sometimes occurs in neurotic individuals ; on the other hand several of the cases mentioned as heart disease would certainly, had they been more definitely described, be set down as angina. One other grave pathological state remains to be noticed in this connection — insanity. To the relationship of insanity with genius great im- portance has by some writers been attached. That such a relationship is apt to occur cannot be doubted, but it is far from being either so frequent or so significant as is assumed by some writers, who rake together cases of insane men of genius without considering what proportion they bear to sane men of genius, nor what relation their insanity bears to their genius. The interest felt in this question is so general that we may be fairly certain that the national biographers have * I may refer to the slightly analogous respiratory defect in horses called " roaring " (due to laryngeal hemiplegia), a neurotic disturbance apt to occur in very highly-bred horses. PATHOLOGY. 189 rarely failed to record the facts bearing on it, although in some cases these facts are dubious and obscure. They may often have passed over gout without mention, but they have seldom failed to mention insanity whenever they knew of its occurrence. It is, therefore, possible to ascertain the prevalence of insanity among the persons on our list with a fair degree of approx- imation to the truth, as it was known to the eminent man's contemporaries. We thus find that 13 were, during a considerable portion of their active or early hves, thoroughly and un- questionably insane, in most cases with a clearly morbid heredity which frequently showed itself in early hfe ; in most cases also they died insane. These were J. Barry, Clare, William CoUins, Cowper, Denham, Fergusson, Gillray, Lee, Pater- son, Pugin, Ritson, Romney, Smart. We further find a second group consisting of individuals who may be said, with a fair degree of certainty, to have been once insane, but whose insanity was either shght, of brief duration, or quickly terminated by death, sometimes by suicide. These were Borrow (?), Chatham (?), Cotman (?), O. Cromwell (?), G. Fox, J. Harrington, Haydon (?), Mrs. Jordan, Kean (?), Lamb, Landseer, Lever, Rodney (?), D. G. Rossetti, Ruskin (?), Tillotson, Sir H. Trollope, Whitbread, 190 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Sir C. H. Williams. A third group consists of men who were perfectly sane during the greater part of long hves filled with strenuous intellectual activity, although in two or three cases there was morbid mental heredity or eccentricity in earlier life. These cases, 12 in number, which may usually be fairly regarded as senile dementia, are H. Cavendish, Colman, Marsh, Newton (?), J. Pearson, Sabine, Southey, Stephen, Swift, Warburton, S. Ward, T. Wright. It would be possible to add a fourth group of borderland cases in which the existence of actual insanity was in most cases dubious, but marked eccen- tricity not amounting to insanity was unquestion- able. Such were Boswell and R. Browne and Laurence Oliphant. Wilham Blake clearly Uved on the borderland of insanity, and Dr. Maudsley indeed declared many years ago that if the story of his sitting naked with his wife in his summer house is to be believed, he was certainly insane ; this, however, one may be permitted to doubt. Blake had strong opinions regarding the action of the sun on the skin, and in a day in which sun baths are regarded as beneficial we may view more intelligently the action of a man who was in many respects a pioneer. I leave this group out of account. Nor are the cases of suicide, at least ten in PATHOLOGY. 191 number, necessarily to be regarded as cases of insanity. If we count every case of probable insanity which may be inferred from the data supplied by the national biographers, and even if we include that decay of the mental faculties which in pre- disposed subjects is liable to occur before death in extreme old age, we find that the ascertainable number of c£ises of insanity is 44, so that the incidence of insanity among our 1,030 eminent persons is 4.2 per cent. It is perhaps a high proportion. I do not know the number of cases among persons of the educated classes living to a high average age in which it can be said that insanity has occurred at least once during life. It may be lower, but at the same time it can scarcely be so very much lower that we are entitled to say that there is a special and peculiar connection between genius and insanity. The association of genius with insanity is not, I believe, without significance, but in face of the fact that its occurrence is only demonstrable in less than 5 per cent, cases, we must put out of court any theory as to genius being a form of insanity. It may be said that although the proportion of insane men of genius is so small, a different result would be attained if we took account of 192 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. those who sprang from insane stocks, or showed their neuropathic unsoundness by producing insane stocks. "It is no exaggeration to say," Dr. Maudsley once boldly wrote, " that there is hardly ever a man of genius who has not insanity or nervous disorder of some form in his family."* It is nearly twenty years since that statement was made, yet neither Dr. Maudsley nor anyone else has yet brought forward any sound evidence in support of it. So far as the present inquiry bears on the point, it may be said that the number of those men of genius who are noted as having a father or mother who became insane, or children who became insane, is very small indeed, the cases of insanity in the descendants being about equal to those of insanity in the ascendants. Less than two per cent, of our eminent persons are stated to have had either insane parents or insane children. We may certainly beheve that the records are incomplete, but there is clearly no ground for believing that an insane heredity is eminently productive of intellectual ability. The notion sometimes put forward that in discouraging the marriages of persons belonging to mentally unsound stocks we are hmiting the production of genius is without support. , * H. Maudsley, " Heredity in Health and Disease," FortnightlylRemew May, 1886. PATHOLOGY. 193 While I cannot compare with any precision the Uabihty of persons of genius to insanity with the similar liabihty of corresponding normal classes, there is one comparison which it is interesting to make. We may compare the liabihty of persons of genius to insanity with the similar habihty of their wives or husbands. It is noted by the national biographers that in 16 cases the wives or husband (there is only one case of the latter*) became insane. We may be fairly certain that this is a decided under- estimate, for while the biographers would hold themselves bound to report the insanity of their subjects, they would not consider themselves equally bound to give similar information con- cerning the wives, while in other cases it may well be that the record of the fact has been lost. If now, in order to make the comparison reasonably fair, we omit the second group of sUght cases of insanity and only admit the first and third groups, we find that the proportion of cases of insanity among the persons of genius is 2.4 per cent. Among the conjugal partners, on the other hand (I have not made any allowance for second marriages), it is 2.2. Thus we see * This was Mrs. Barbauld's husband ; it may be added that the man to whom Harriet Martineau was engaged became insane, and that Hannah Mere's marriage was. prevented by what seems the morbid eccentricity of the man. 13 194 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. that on a roughly fair estimate the difference between the incidence of insanity on British persons of genius and on their wives or husbands is a nehgible difference ; it is scarcely hazardous to assert that British men of genius have probably not been more Uable to insanity than their wives. At the first glance it might seem that this may be taken to indicate that the liability of genius to insanity is exactly the normal Hability. That, however, would be a very rash conclusion. If the wives of men of genius were chosen at random from the general population it would hold good. But there is a well-recognised ten- dency, — observed among all the mentally abnor- mal classes, — for abnormal persons to be sexually attracted to each other. That this tendency prevails largely among persons of eminent intel- lectual ability many of us may have had occasion to observe. What we see, therefore, is not so much the conjunction of an abnormal and a normal class of persons, but the presence of two abnormal classes. With regard to the significance of insanity, it must be pointed out that even if there is a slightly unusual liability to insanity among men of genius, there is no general tendency for genius and insanity, even when occurring in the same PATHOLOGY. 195 individual, to be concomitant. Just as it is rare to find anything truly resembling genius in an asylum, so it is rare to find any true insanity in a man of genius when engaged on his best work. The simulation of it may occur, — either the " divine mania " of the artistic creator, or a very high degree of eccentricity, — but not true and definite insanity. There seem to be very few certain cases — mostly poets — in which the best work was done during the actual period of insanity. Christopher Smart's one master- piece may be said to be actually inspired by insanity, and much of Cowper's best work was written under the influence of insanity. Periods of insanity may alternate with periods of high intellectual achievement, just as gout may alternate with various neurotic conditions, but the two states are not concomitant, and genius cannot be accurately defined as a disease. It must also be pointed out, in estimating the significance of the relationship between genius and insanity, that the insane group is on the whole not one of commanding intellectual pre- eminence. It cannot compare in this respect with the gouty group, which is not much larger, and the individuals of greatest eminence are usually the slightest or the most doubtful cases. Among poets and men of letters, of an order 13* 196 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. below the highest, insanity has been somewhat apt to occur ; marked eccentricity almost or quite amounting to insanity has been prevalent among antiquarians, but the intellectual eminence of antiquarians is often so dubious that the question of their inclusion in my list has been a frequent source of embarrassment. If we turn from insanity to other grave nervous diseases, we are struck by their rarity. It is true that many serious nervous diseases have only been accurately distinguished during the past century, and we could not expect to find much trace of them in the Dictionary. But that cannot be said of epilepsy, which has always been recognised, and in a well-developed form cannot easily be ignored. Y^t epilepsy is only mentioned twice by the national biographers — once as oc- curring in early life (Lord Herbert of Cherbury), once in old age (Sir W. R. Hamilton). Even these two cases, however, cannot be admitted. In Lord Herbert of Cherbury's case the national biographer has simply misunderstood a passage in Lord Herbert's Autobiography, in which he tells us how, as he believed, he escaped the epilepsy which he says is common in his family by acquiring a minor disorder in childhood, a " defiuxion of the ears" which "purged his system ; " in Sir W. R. Hamilton's case the PATHOLOGY. 197 epileptoid fits occuring in old age most certainly cannot be regarded as true epilepsy. There appears to be nothing whatever in the records of British genius favourable to Lombroso's favourite theory, that genius tends to occur on an epileptoid basis. While, however, grave nervous diseases of definite type seem to be rare rather than common among the eminent persons with whom we are dealing, there is ample evidence to show that nervous symptoms of vaguer and more atypical character are extremely common. The prevalence of eccentricity I have already mentioned. That irritable condition of the nervous system which, in its Protean forms, is now commonly called neurasthenia, is evidently very widespread among them, and probably a large majority have been subject to it. Various definite forms of minor nervous derangement are also common. Among the minor forms of nervous derangement stammering is of very great significance. I have ascertained that at least 13 of the eminent persons on my list (12 men and one woman) stammered. These were Bagehot (?), R. Boyle, Curran, Croker, Erasmus Darwin, Dodgson, Mrs. Inchbald, C. Kingsley, Lamb, Maginn, Priestley, Shell, Sidgwick. Seven others are noted as having defects of speech which are sometimes stated 198 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. not to amount to a stammer, but in other cases were doubtless ordinary stammering. When it is remembered that the normal occurrence of stammering among adults is much below one per cent, and also that my record is certainly very incomplete, it will be seen that there can be no doubt whatever as to the abnormal prevalence of stammering among British persons of ability. It may be added that 25 persons are described as having a high, shrill, feminine, small or weak voice ; this also is certainly very decidedly less than the real number. Stammering may be defined as a functional disturbance of the central nervous system, congenital or acquired, characterised by involuntary, disorderly spasms in certain muscles concerned in vocal utterance.* In other words, it is a spastic neurosis of muscular co-ordination. HartweU, following Marshall Hall, describes it as a St. Vitus's dance of the finer, more peripheral muscles of speech. Stammering is frequently distinguished from stuttering, but it is unnecessary to observe any dis- tinction here, as our knowledge of the precise nature of the voice defects found among our men of genius is often imperfect. We may with Wyllie regard " stammering " as the general term. Clouston, in his Nuroses of Develop- ment, regards stammering as specially associated with rapid brain growth, and as most likely to occur between * E. M. Hartwell ("Report of the Director of Physical Training," Boston School Document, No. 8, 1894) has dealt in an interesting manner with the prevalence of this defect and its significance. PATHOLOGY. 199 birth and the seventh year. In his careful investigation among Boston school children Hartwell found that stammering became more prevalent at the beginning of accelerated growth, just before or just after such growth culminates, and again after its cessation, and he concludes that the irritability of the nervous system of which stammering is an expression, is correlated with the most marked upward and downward fluctuations of the power of the organism to resist lethal influences. Stammering is much less common in adults than in children and is three to four times more frequent in men. Among male adults its frequency has been most carefully investigated in recruits, and its prevalence found to be, according to the standard adopted, 3 to 6 per thousand in France (Chervin), as well as among French recruits in the American War of Secession (Baxter), 1.2 per thousand among native American recruits during the same war (Baxter), and exactly the same in Russia (Ssikorski). In persons of neuropathic inheritance, stammering is specially liable to occur. " Even in the very intelli- gent," WyUie remarks (Disorders of Speech, p. 22), " it may be found associated with nervousness and excit- ability as weU as sometimes with more distinct indications of irritability of the nervous system." Among the nervously abnormal classes stammering and allied speech defects occur with especial frequency. This is notably the case among mental defectives. Thus in Berlin, Cassel found that 33.5 per cent, of defective children showed infirmities of speech, and Dr. Eichholz, a London School Inspector, states (" The Treatment of Feeble-minded Children," Brit. Med. Journal, 6 September, 1902) that " quite 75 per [cent, of defective 200 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. children speak imperfectly, ranging from complete aphasia to a mere indistinct thickening, including stammering, halting, lisping, word-chpping, mispro- nunciation, and the mainly purely vocal imperfections." Most of the minor speech defects mentioned would seem to have been specially prevalent among our British men of genius. The tendency to very high-pitched voice which is so remarkably common in men of intellectual ability may possibly be due to a slight paralysis of the vocal cords, such as is apt to occur in more marked degrees in general paralysis (as observed by Permewan, Brit, Med. Journal, 24 Nov. 1894), unless it is caused by a general arrest of laryngeal development. Involuntary spasmodic twitching movements, or tic, of the smaller muscles, especially of the face, would appear to occur with very unusual frequency among our British men of genius, although I have no figures of the prevalence of such convulsive movements among the ordinary population. I have noted the prevalence of this nervous disorder in seven cases : Brougham, W. Hook, Dr. Johnson, C. Kingsley, Marshall, J.S. Mill, and Paley. In another form a tendency to nervous inco- ordination is shown, by no means necessarily by any actual tremours, in the tendency to bad handwriting. Illegible handwriting is mentioned in nine cases which certainly need to be largely increased. PATHOLOGY. ' 201 A tendency to scrawling or illegible handwriting has been frequently noted among the men of genius of many countries and is by no means due to too much writing, for it is often traceable at an early age. It must be remembered that the handwriting is a very delicate indication of the nervous balance, and as such has been carefully studied during recent years by Kraepehn and his pupils, while alienists have long been accustomed to attribute significance to the remarkable changes in handwriting which often occur under the influence of insanity. As Goodhart has truly remarked {Lancet, 6 July, i88g), " illegibility is a disease " ; and he compares it to the defects of speech. Writer's cramp, to which Olegible handwriting is occasionally due, is also, it must be remarked, not the mere result of excessive writing, for, as F6re points out ("Professional Neuroses," Twentieth Century Practice of Medicine, Vol. x. p. 707) it occurs more frequently in high officials than in their subordinates who write more, and is associated with mental over-work and neurasthenic and neuropathic conditions. Short sight, another condition frequently oc- curring on a basis of hereditary nervous defect, is noted as existing in an extreme degree 16 times, and in 12 cases some other sense was defective or absent. A condition to which I am incUned to attribute considerable significance from the present point of view is clumsiness in the use of the hands and awkwardness in walking. A singular degree of clumsiness or awkwardness is noted many 202 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. times by the national biographers^ although they have certainly regarded it merely as a curious trait, and can scarcely have realised its profound significance as an index to the unbalanced make-up of the nervous system. This peculiarity is very frequently noted as occurring in persons^ who are tall, healthy, robust, full of energy. As boys they are sometimes not attracted to games, and cannot, if they try, succeed in acquiring skill in games ; as they grow up all sorts of physical exercise present unusual difficulties to them ; they cannot, for instance, learn to ride ; even if fond of shooting, they may be unable to hit anything ; in walking they totter and shuffle unsteadily ; they are always meeting with accidents. Priestley, though great in experiment, was too awkward to handle a tool ; Macaulay could not wield a razor or even tie his own neckcloth ; Shelley, though lithe and active, was always tumbling upstairs or tripping on smooth lawns. It would be easy to fill many pages with similar examples. It is noted of at least 55 eminent men and women on our hst that they displayed one or more such inaptitudes to acquire properly the muscular co-ordinations needed for various simple actions of hfe. In numerous cases this clumsiness was combined with voice defect. PATHOLOGY. 203 The reality of the connection between clumsiness of musciilax co-ordination and mental anomaly is clearly shown by the fact that in idiocy, the most extreme form of mental anomaly, this clumsiness is seen at its maximum. " In general," remarks Dr. W. W. Ireland {The Mental Affections of Children, 1898, p. 319), " idiots or imbecile children are awkward in their motions and slow at learning to walk No doubt the cause of this lateness in learning to walk is in some cases owing to weakness, in others to nervous diseases ; but there are still cases where the child always appeared strong and healthy Their gait, too, is awkward. Idiots in general have a bad balance. . . . . The same awkwardness applies to the hand." The awkwardness in the case of idiots is doubtless largely due to absence of mental power. In genius the same result is brought about not by absence of mental power, but by the streaming — not only functionally, it is probable, but organically — of the mental energy into other channels. A cause which we may even consider opposite, leads to a like defect in the musctdar machinery. 204 IX. STATURE. Nature of the data — ^Tendency of British men of ability to vary from the average in the direction of short and more especially of tall stature — ^Ap- parent deficiency of the medium-sized. As regards stature, I have succeeded in obtaining information in 362 cases ; in 276 cases the infor- mation is indefinite, in 86 cases definite. In the first and larger group, which includes women, 119 are said to be tall, 74 of average or medium height, while 83 are short. There is frequently some difference of opinion regarding an eminent person's height, and in selecting the most probable estimate I have borne in mind the common tendency to regard a man who is reaUy of average height as short, and to regard a tall man as of average height ; our standard of height, in other words, tends to be above that for the general population. There stiU results, however, an abnormally small proportion of medium-sized persons, although these form the bulk of the popu- lation. This discrepancy may be accounted for, STATURE. 205 in part, by a tendency among biographers to ignore stature when it shows no exceptional deviation from the average. The smaller group of men of genius whose height is definitely known furnishes evidence of a more rehable character. The distribution of height in this group is as follows : — ft. in. ft. in. 5 2 5 9 7 S I 3 S 10 14 5 2 I 5 " 10 5 3 3 6 9 S 4 I 6 I 9 5 S 2 6 2 I S 6 S 6 3 • 4 5 7 5 6. 4 . 3 S 8 • 7 It will be noted that here, as in the other group, we still have a marked deficiency of medium-sized persons, and a predominance of the tall over the short. It may be said that here also there has been a tendency to ignore the height of the average-sized men of genius, and such a tendency may be admitted as, in the past at all events, accounting for this deficiency ; the very marked preponderance of the tall over the short still remains. If we take 5 ft. 9 in. as the average of the class producing men of abiUty (this was the average 2o6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. height of the fathers of Gait on' s Enghsh men of science), we find that fifty of our men of genius are above that height and only twenty-nine below it. It will be observed that there is a very considerable proportion of individuals over six feet in height, and as various other persons on our list are described as gigantic, although their precise stature is not known, we must conclude that there really is an excess of such abnormally tall persons. It is noteworthy that the men of genius who spring from the lower social classes tend to be abnormally tall. The lower social classes are always shorter on the average than the upper classes.* But it is remarkable that among the very small number of our British men of genius who have sprung from the lower social strata a considerable proportion are not only tall, but excessively tall. Of the seventeen British men of genius who are known to have been 6 ft. i in. or over in height, at least seven sprang from the peasantry or a lower than middle-class social group ; these include Cook, Cobbett, Trevitheck and Borrow. It would appear, — although I do not propose to discuss this question here, — that the organic impulse to intellectual predominance, * The evidence on this point has been brought together by H. de Varigny, art. "Croissance," Richet's Dictionnaire de Physiologic, Vol. IV. STATURE. 207 most clearly seen in those individuals on our list whose social environment has been against their development, tends in some degree to be asso- ciated with a corresponding energy in physical growth. There may well be in men of genius a tendency to physical variation in both direc- tions, to deficiency as well as to excess, but it is predominantly in the direction of excess.* The average height of Cambridge students is nearly 5 feet 9 inches (cm. 174.8). Nearly all other classes of the community in England are below this height. Porter among St. Louis children {Publications Am. Statistical Soc. 1894) found that superior intellectual capacity is associated with superior stature, and inferior intellectual capacity with inferior stature. Christopher {Journ. Am. Med. Ass. 15 September, 1900), found the same result among Chicago school children. This result has been severely criticised and cannot be accepted without qualification. Gilbert at Iowa found no such correlation but rather the reverse. It must be remem- bered that there are various kinds and degrees of ability and various ways of testing it. Nor can it be assumed that results that hold good of average school children, — even when we have definitely ascertained what those results are, — necessarily hold good also of men of genius, who are an extremely exceptional class. PapiUault {Bull. Soc. d'Anth. de Paris, 1899, p. 446) has found that giantism is sometimes associated with * The results here reached concerning British men of genius accord with the results elsewhere reached on a somewhat wider basis in a paper (" Genius and Stature," Nineteenth Century, July, 1897) in which I have discussed some of the problems here involved. 2o8 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. infantilism (more or less glabrous condition of body, defective pigmentation, more or less under-development of sexual organs and impulse, etc.), although infantile persons have no necessary tendency to become giants. He believes that there is some deep underlying but yet undetermined connection between the giantism and the infantilism. This is interesting in view of the frequent association of some degree of infantilism with some degree of gigantism in men of extraordinary intel- lectual ability. Combe stated that individuals born in summer tend to be taller than those bom in winter. Although the numbers are far too small for any decisive statement, our British men of genius possibly show such a tendency. Unless we take the extremely low heights, there is not indeed an absolute majority of winter-born (October — March) over summer-born (April — September) among the short. But it certainly appears that while among those whose height is below five feet five inches there are as many as four winter-born to six summer-born, among those who are over six feet one inch there is only one winter-bom to six summer born. It was found by Arthur MacDonald that in America first-born children of school age tend to be larger than later children. This is not in accordance with the results found at birth, nor can it be said to hold good as regards the very meagre data furnished by the British men of genius on my list. A strict comparison is not possible, but it may at all events be said that the pre- ponderence of eldest children among British men of genius below five feet seven inches in height is somewhat greater, — if indeed there can be said to be any real difference, — than among those who are over five feet ten inches. 209 X. PIGMENTATION. Hair-colour and eye-colour — Method of classification — Sources of data — The index of pigmentation — Its marked variation in the different intellectual groups — Some probable causes for this variation. If we turn to a further anthropological character, pigmentation, or the colour of the hair and eyes, I am able to bring forward a larger body of evidence, and it is not difficult to supplement the data furnished by the Dictionary with the help of portraits, more especially those in the National Portrait GaUery.* I have information on this point concerning 424 of the eminent persons on our list. In classifying by pigmentation I have relied in the first place on the eye-colour, but have allowed hair-colour a certain influence in • The determination of the pigmentation of portraits has been in nearly all cases by personal inspection. The only exception is in the case of several eminent Scotch personages virhose portraits were exhibited at the Edinburgh Loan Exhibition of Scottish National Portraits, in 1884. Dr. Beddoe was kind enough to lend me his own carefully annotated catalogue of this Exhibition, with permission to make use of his notes. I availed myself of this permission when necessary, with, I need scarcely say, entire confidence, since Dr. Beddoe is our chief authority on the pigmentation of British peoples. 14 210 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. modifpng the class in those cases in which there was marked divergence between the two in hght- ness and darkness. I have sorted the eminent persons into three classes, according as their eyes wfere unpigmented (blue), highly pigmented (brown), or occupying an intermediate position (combinations of blue with yellow, orange or brown).* This intermediate class has neces- sarily been large, and I have comprised within it three sub-divisions : a fair medium, a dark medium, and, between these two, a doubtful mediums I found that the 424 individuals might be thus classed as regards eye-colour : unpigmented, 71 ; light medium, 99 ; doubtful medium, 54 ; dark medium, 85 ; fully pigmented, 115. The ques- tion arose as to how the results thus obtained might be conveniently formulated, so as to enable us to compare the different groups of eminent persons. I finally decided to proceed with each of these groups as follows : The doubtful medium persons in each of these classes were divided * The chief terms used, popularly and in literature, to describe eye colour are (besides blue, which is frequently applied to eyes by no means purely blue), grey, hazel and black. " Grey " is applied to light mixed eyes, i.e., those which show blue with some admixture of yellow or orange; "hazel," to dark mixed or greenish brown, and sometimes to fully pigmented brown eyes ; " black " eyes do not really exist at all. It seems to me that the terms "grey," "hazel," and "black," should never be used when we are attempting to define eye-colour with any degree of precision — a som what difficult matter at the best. I may add that my division of eyes into these main classes is substantially the same as Dr. Beddoe's. PIGMENTATION. 211 equally between the fair medium and the dark medium ; then two-thirds of the fair medium persons were added to the fair class, the remaining third to the dark class, and, likewise, two-thirds of the dark medium were added to the dark class, the remaining third to the fair class ; the five classes were thus reduced to two, and, on multi- plying the fair by 100 and dividing by the dark, we obtain what may be called an index of pig- mentation. This method of notation is really simple, and is quite sufficiently accurate for the natiire of the data dealt with ; it will be seen that by its use an index of 100 means that fair and dark people are equally numerous in a group, while indices over 100 mean an excess of fair persons, and indices under 100 an excess of dark persons. I may remark concerning this index of pig- mentation that, while it 5delds results which are strictly comparable among themselves in the hands of a single observer, proceeding in a uniform manner, it is doubtful whether two observers would carry it out in a strictly identical manner. Beddoe's index of nigrescence, founded on hair- colour and applied directly to living subjects, is a convenient formula for indicating the degree of pigmentation. But in my observations, largely made on portraits (in which the hair was often 14* 212 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. whitened by age, absent, concealed beneath a wig, or obscured by the darkening of the paint), it was necessary to accept eye-colour as the primary basis of classification. I have been able to obtain the index of pig- mentation in the case of fourteen groups. I present them with their index of pigmentation in the order of decreasing fairness, noting also the number of individuals in each group. Some indi- viduals, I may remark, are included in more than one group, while various miscellaneous persons are not included at all. Group, with Number of Individuals Index of Pigmentation Social and political reformers . . (6) .. 400 Scholars (7) .. 200 Lawyers (is) - 114 Soldiers (23) •• IIO Men of science (45) •• 109 Sailors (13) ■• 100 Philosophers (12) .. 100 Painters, sculptors and architects (38) ■• 94 Poets ■ (58) .. 90 Men and women of letters (98) .. 79 Statesmen (49) •• 78 Explorers (7) .. 66 Divines (44) •• 48 Actors and actresses (18) .. 30 Although the numbers are for some groups few, and we must not regard the index as giving results which are quite invariable, we may accept PIGMENTATION. 213 the general results with some confidence. It may be regarded as fairly certain that the first six groups do really tend to be unusually fair, and the last three groups unusually dark. The aver- age index of pigmentation for the British popula- tion generally probably lies between eighty and one hundred, but it varies greatly if we take separate districts, being very high in many parts of Scotland and very low in many parts of the West of England. It is fairly obvious that this fact furnishes, to some extent, a key to the position of the various groups in reference to this index. Sailors, who tend to be fair, come largely from the coast, and the inhabitants of the coast are usually fairer than people from inland districts. Men of science come largely from regions where the population is fair. Artists tend to be fair, both in England and France, and it is at first a httle surprising to find that they do not appear higher upon the hst. It may be pointed out, however, that a large proportion of our most eminent painters come from East Anglia, a region in which, though the hair is not very dark, the eye-colour is very frequently brown.* Actors * During a recent walk from Sudbury to Hadleigh, in Central Suffolk, I noted the eye-colour of the children and adults I passed, and found that the proportion of brownish eyes to bluish eyes was about 70 per cent, to 30 per cent. On the following day I found myself in Colchester, Essex, on Market day ; here the proportions were reversed : there were about 70 per cent, bluish eyes to about 30 per cent, brownish. 214 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. come largely from regions where the population is dark. But this factor, though it accounts for much, will not account for everything, nor will it explain the decisiveness of the results. Divines come from all parts of the United Kingdom, yet they tend to be distinctly dark*. The darkness of eminent actors is very marked, whatever their place of origin ; only one of the eighteen on my list, Munden, falls in the unpigmented group, and he is certainly not an actor of the highest rank. The extreme fairness of political agitators and social reformers (religious reformers, who tend to be decidedly dark, not being included) is peculiar. The darkness of travellers and ex- plorers may be explained by a kind of natural selection, fair persons speedily succumbing to the effects of tropical climates ; it may be remarked that this group would have been still darker if it had not been for the presence of two or three individuals, of so-called Celtic type, who are fairly pigmented on the whole, though their eyes are not dark. It would, however, be out of place here to discuss fully the very interesting question of the significance of pigment in relation to in- tellectual ability, t * This result has also been reached by Dr. Beddoe. + I have briefly discussed it in an article entitled " The Comparative Abilities of the Fair and the Dark," Monthly Review, August, 1901. PIGMENTATION. 215 The results of this enquiry are on the whole con- firmed by an enquiry I have elsewhere carried out as to the index of pigmentation of all the persons whose portraits are to be seen in the National Portrait Gallery, and whose eyes are fairly visible (Monthly Review, August, 1901). I may say that I regard the results of my observations in the National Portrait Gallery (though some of the data are common to both series of observations) as distinctly more trustworthy in the light they throw on the relationship of pigmentation to intellectual avocation, not only because the numbers are larger but also because the standard of ability is much lower, so that the influences of predilection in the direction of the intellectual ability is less compli- cated by the possibly disturbing factor of very high and versatile intellectual ability. Thus in the small group of very eminent sailors we have several very exceptional men like Cook and Dampier, who were notably dark ; the large number of more typical but less eminent sailors in the National Portrait Gallery give us a higher index, which is doubtless nearer to the truth. (I should add, however, that the index of pigmentation was here obtained in a way that at one point slightly differed from that adopted in the later series, i.e., in the National Portrait Gallery groups I simply divided all the medium persons in each group equally between the unpigmented and the fuUy pigmented sections.) Group, with Number of Individuals. Index of Pigmentation Political reformers and agitators (20) .. 233 Sailors (45) •• 150 Men of science (53) ■■ 131 Soldiers (42) .. "3 Artists (74) " III 2l6 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Group, with Number of Individuals. Poets (56) Royal family ,„ ... ... (66) Lawyers ... ... ... (56J Created peers and their sons ... (89) Statesmen ... ... (53) Men and women of letters ... (87) Hereditary aristocracy ... (149) Divines... ... ... ... (57) Men of low birth (12) Explorers ... ... ... (8) Actors and actresses ... ... (16) Index of Pigmentation. 107 107 107 102 89 85 82 58 5° 33 33 217 XI. OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. Personal beauty or the reverse — The eyes — Shyness and timidity — Tendency to melancholy — Persecution by the world. A PHYSICAL characteristic to which the na- tional biographers frequently allude, though I do not propose to attempt to give it any numerical values, is personal beauty or the absence of it. A very large proportion of persons are referred to as notably handsome, comely, imposing ; a very considerable, but smaller, proportion are spoken of as showing some disproportion or liS5nimietry of feature, body or limbs, as notably pecuhar or even ludicrous in appearance. A not uncommon type is that of the stunted giant, with massive head and robust body, but very short legs. There is one feature, however, which is noted as striking and beautiful in a very large number of cases, even in persons who are otherwise wholly without physical attractions. That is the eyes. It is very frequently found that descriptions of the 2i8 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. personal appearance of men of genius, however widely they may differ in other respects, agree in noting an unusual brilliancy of the eyes. Thus the eyes of Burns were said by one observer to be like " coals of living fire," and Scott writes that they " literally glowed " ; while of Chatter- ton's eyes it was said that there was " fire rolling at the bottom of them." It is significant that both of these instances, chosen almost at random, were poets. While, however, the phenomenon seems to be noted more frequently and with more emphasis in poets, it is found among men of genius of all classes. One may suppose it to be connected with an unusual degree of activity of the cerebral circulation. In regard to the mental and emotional dis- position of British persons of genius, the national biographers enable us to trace the prevalence of one or two tendencies. One of these is shy- ness, bashfulness, or timidity. This is noted in sixty-eight cases, while fifty are described as very sensitive, nervous, or emotional, and, although this is not equivalent to a large per- centage, it must of course be remembered that the real number of such cases is certainly very much larger, and also that the characteristic is in many cases extremely well marked. Some had to abandon the profession they had chosen OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. 219 on account of their nervous shyness at appear- ing in pubUc ; others were too bashful to declare their love to the women they were attracted to ; Sir Thomas Browne, one of the greatest masters of English prose, was so modest that he was always blushing causelessly ; Hooker, one of the chief luminaries of the EngUsh Church, could never look any one in the face ; Dryden, the recognized prince of the hterary men of his time, was, said Congreve, the most easily put out .of countenance of any man he had ever met. It is not difficult to see why the timid temperament, — which is very far from involving lack of courage,* — should be especially associated with intellectual aptitudes. It causes a distaste for social contact and so favours those forms of activity which may be exerted in soUtudCj these latter, again, reacting to produce increased awk- wardness in social relations. Moreover, the mental state of timidity, which may be regarded as a mild form of folic du doute, a perpetual self- questioning and uncertainty, however unpleasant it may be from the social point of view, is by no means an unsatisfactory attitude in the face of intellectual problems, for it involves that un- * " None are so bold as the timid when they are fairly roused," wrote Mrs. Browning in her Letters. The same point has been brought out by Dugas in his essay on timidity. 220 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. ceasing self-criticism which is an essential ele- ment of all good intellectual work, and has marked more or less clearly the greatest men of scientific genius. Fundamentally, no doubt, timidity is a minor congenital defect of the nervous mechan- ism, fairly comparable to stammering. It may be noted that the opposite characteristic of over self-confidence, with more or less tendency to arrogance and insolence, is also noted, but with much less frequency, and usually in men whose eminence is not due to purely intellectual qualities. In some cases, it would seem, the two opposite tendencies are com- bined, the timid man seeking refuge from his own timidity in the assumption of arrogance. In a certain number of cases information is given as to the general emotional disposition, whether to melancholy and depression, or of a gay, cheerful and genial character. In eighty-five cases the disposition is noted as melancholy, in twenty as cheerful or jovial ; in seven cases both dispositions are noted as occurring, in varying association, in the same person. This marked tendency to melancholy among persons of intellectual aptitude is no new observation, but was indeed one of the very earliest points noted concerning men of genius. According to a saying attributed to Aristotle, all men of ability are melan- choly, and Reveille-Parise, one of the first and still OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. 221 one of the most sagacious of the modern writers on genius, devoted a chapter to the point. It is not altogether difficult to account for this phenomenon. Melancholy children, as Marro found, are in large pro- portion the offspring of elderly fathers, as we have also found our persons of intellectual eminence to be. A tendency to melancholy, again, even though it may always fall short of insane melancholia, is allied to those neurotic and abnormal conditions which we have found to be not infrequent. Moreover, it certainly has a stimulating influence on intellectual work. The more normal men of cheerful disposition instinctively seeks the consolations of society. The melancholy man, like the shy man, is iU-adapted to society, and more natuTEiUy seeks his consolations in a non-social field, such as that of the intellect, often plunging more deeply into intellectual work the more profound his melancholy becomes. Wagner said that his best work was done at times of melancholy, and among the eminerit men on our list several writers are mentioned who turned to authorship as a relief to personal depression. It may also be said that not only is melancholy a favourable condition for intellectual work, but that the sedentary and nerve-exhausting nature of nearly all forms of intellectual work in turn reacts to emphasize or produce moods of depression. Another cause that serves largely to accentuate the tendency of men of genius to melancholy is the attitude of the world towards them. Every original worker in intellectual fields, every man who makes some new thing, is certain to arouse hostility where he does not meet with indifference. He sets out in his chosen path, ignorant of men, but moved by high ideals, content 222 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. to work in laborious solitude and to wait, and when at last he turns to his fellows, saying, " See what I have done for you ! " he often finds that he has to meet only the sneering prejudices of the few who might have com- prehended, and the absolute indifference of the many who are too absorbed in the daily struggle for bread to comprehend any intellectual achievement. The wise worker knows this and arms himself with benevolent contempt, alike against the few and the many. Thus of one of the great men of science on our list, Stephen Hales, it was said that he could look " even upon those who did him unkind offices without any emotion of particular indignation, not from want of discernment or sensibility ; but he used to consider them only like those experiments which, upon trial, he found could never be applied to any useful purpose, and which he therefore calmly and dispassionately laid aside." But it has to be remembered that the prevailing temperament of men of genius is one of great nervous sensitiveness and irritability, — so that, as Reveill^-Parise puts it, they are apt to " roar at a pin-prick," — and even when they are weU aware what the opinion of the world is worth, they stiU cannot help being profoundly affected by that opinion. Hence a fruitful source of melan- choly. The attitude of the world towards the man of original intellect, being not merely one of disdain or indifference, but constantly tending to become aggressive, has certainly reinforced the tendency to melancholy. It is practically impossible to estimate the amount of persecution to which this group of pre-eminent British persons has been OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. 223 subjected, for it has shown itself in innumerable forms, and varies between a mere passive refusal to have an5d;hing whatever to do with them or their work and the active infliction of physical torture and death. There is, however, at least one form of persecution, very definite in character, which it is easy to estimate, since the national biographers have probably in few cases passed it over. I refer to imprisonment. I find that at least 160, or over 16 per cent., of our 975 eminent men were imprisoned, once or oftener, for periods of varying length, while many others only escaped imprisonment by voluntary exile. It is true that the causes of imprisonment were various, but even imprisonment for such a cause as debt may usually be taken to indicate an anomalous lack of adjustment to the social environment. The man of genius is an abnormal being, thus arousing the instinctive hostiUty of society, which by every means seeks to put him out of the way. It will be seen that the various personal traits noted in this section, while completing our picture of British persons of genius, may be hnked on at numerous points to other traits we have pre- viously noted. It only remains to gather together the threads we have traced and to ascertain how far they may be harmoniously woven into a complete whole. 224 XII. CONCLUSIONS. The characteristics of men of genius probably to a large extent independent of the particular field their ability is shown in — What is the temperament of genius ?— In what sense genius is healthy — The probable basis of inapti- tude for ordinary life — In what sense genius is a neurosis. It may be reasonable to ask, in estimating the significance of those characteristics of British persons of genius we have here ascertained, to what degree an investigation of persons of emi- nent intellectual aptitude belonging to other countries would bring out different results. It is not possible to answer this question quite decisively. The fact, however, that at many points our investigation simply gives precision to characteristics which have been noted as marking genius in various countries seems to indicate that in all probability the characters that constitute genius are fundamentally alike in all countries, though it may well be that minor modifications are associated with national differences. The CONCLUSIONS. 225 point is one that can only be decisively settled when similar investigations are carried out con- cerning similar groups of persons of superior intellectual ability belonging to various countries. A further question may be asked: How far has confusion been introduced by lumping to- gether persons whose intellectual aptitudes have been shown in very different fields ? May not the average biological characteristics of the man of science be the reverse of those of the actor, and those of the divine at the other extreme from those of the lawyer ? I believe that Mr. Galton is inchned to think that the investigation of groups of men with different intellectual aptitudes would 5deld different results. As, however, we have seen, the investigation of eminent British persons, when carried out without reference to the par- ticular fields in which their activities have been exercised, yields results which, when comparable with those of Galton, do not usually show any striking discrepancies. Nor, so far as I have at present looked into the matter, does it appear that on the whole, when we consider separately the various groups of British eminent persons we are here concerned with, such groups show any widely var5dng biological characters. Certain variations there certainly are ; we have seen that the geo- graphical distribution of the various kinds of 15 226 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. intellectual activity to some extent varies, and also that in pigmentation there are in some cases marked variations. On the whole, however, it would appear that, whatever the field in which it displays itself, the elements that constitute the temperament of genius show a tendency to re- semble each other. I shall probably be asked to define precisely what the " temperament " is that underlies genius. That, however, is a question which the material before us only enables us to approach very cautiously. There are two distinct ten- dencies among writers on genius. On the one hand are those who seem to assume that genius is a strictly normal variation. This is the stand- point of Galton.* On the other hand are those, chiefly alienists, who assume that genius is funda- mentally a pathological condition and closely allied to insanity. This is the position of Lom- broso, who compares genius to a pearl, — so regard- ing it as a pathological condition, the result of morbid irritation, which by chance has produced a beautiful result, — and who seeks to find the germs of genius among the literary and artistic productions of the inmates of lunatic asylums. It can scarcely be said that the course of our * In the preface to the second edition of Hereditary Genius Mr. Galton has somewhat modified this view. CONCLUSIONS. 227 investigation, uncertain as it may sometimes appear, has led to either of these conclusions. On the one hand, we have found along various lines the • marked prevalence of conditions which can hardly be said to be consonant with a normal degree of health or the normal conditions of vitality ; on the other hand, it canriot be said that we have seen any ground to infet that there is any general connection between genius and insanity, or that genius tends to pro- ceed from famihes in which insanity is prevalent ; for while it is certainly true that insanity occurs with unusualT frequency among men of genius, it is very rare to find that periods of intellectual abiHty are combined with periods of insanity, and it is, moreover, notable that (putting aside senile forms of insanity) the intellectual achieve- ments of those eminent men in whom unques- tionable insanity has occurred have rarely been of a very high order. We cannot, therefore, regard genius either as a purely healthy variation occurring within normal limits, nor yet as a radically pathological condition, not even as an alternation — a sort of allotropic form — of in- sanity. We may rather regard it as a highly sensitive and complexly developed adjustment of the nervous system along special Unes, with con- comitant tendency to defect along other hues. 15* 228 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. Its elaborate organization along special lines is often built up on a basis even less highly organized than that of the ordinary average man. It is no paradox to say that the real affinity of genius is with congenital imbecility rather than with insanity. If indeed we consider the matter well we see that it must be so. The organization that is well adapted for adjustment to the ordinary activities of the life it is born into is not prompted to find new adjustments to suit itself. The or- ganic inhibition of ordinary activities is, necessarily, a highly favourable condition for the development of extraordinary abilities, when these are present in a latent condition. Hence it is that so many men of the highest intellectual aptitudes have so often shown the tendency to muscular incoordination and clumsiness which marks idiots, and that even within the intellectual sphere, when straying outside their own province, they have frequently shown a lack of perception which placed them on scarcely so high a level as the man of average inteUigence. It is not surprising that by means of the idiots savants, the wonderful calculators, the mattoids and " men of one idea," and the men whose intellectual originality is strictly con- fined to one field, we may bridge the gulf that divides idiocy from genius. Since a basis of organic inaptitude — a condition CONCLUSIONS. 229 which in a more marked and unmitigated form we call imbecility — may thus often be traced at the foundation of genius, we must regard it as a more fundamental fact in the constitution of genius than the undue prevalence of insanity, which is merely a state of mental dissolution, in nearly every case temporarily or permanently abolishing the aptitude for intellectual achieve- ment. It must not, however, be hastily concluded that the prevalence of insanity among men of genius is an accidental fact, meaningless or un- accoimtable. In reality it is a very significant fact. The intense cerebral energy of intellectual reaction involves an expenditure of tissue which is not the dissolution of insanity, for waste and repair must here be balanced, but it reveals an instabihty which may sink into the mere disso- lution of insanity, if the balance of waste and repair is lost and the high pressure tension faUs out of gear. Insanity is rather a Nemesis of the pecuUar intellectual energy of genius exerted at a prolonged high tension than an essential ele- ment in the foundation of genius. But a ger- minal nervous instability, such as to the ordinary mind simulates some form of insanity, is certainly present from the first in many cases of genius and is certainly of immense value in creating the visions or stimulating the productiveness of men 230 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. of genius. We have seen how significant a gouty inheritance seems to be. A typical example of this in recent years was presented by William Morris, a man of very original genius, of great physical vigour and strength, of immense capacity for work, who was at the same time abnormally restless, very irritable, and liable to random ex- plosions of nervous energy. Morris inherited from his mother's side a peculiarly strong and solid constitution ; on his father's side he in- herited a neurotic and gouty strain. It is evi- dent that, given the robust constitution, the germinal instability furnished by such a morbid element as this — falling far short of insanity — acts as a precious fermentative element, an' essential constituent in the man's genius. The mistake usually made is to exaggerate the insane character of such a fermentative element, and at the same time to ignore the element of sane and robust vigour which is equally essen- tial to any high degree of genius. We may perhaps accept the ancient dictum of Aristotle as reported by Seneca : " No great genius with- out some mixture of insanity." But we have to remember that the " insanity " is not more than a mixture, and it must be a finely tem- pered mixture. This conclusion, suggested by our survey of CONCLUSIONS. 231 British persons of pre-eminent intellectual apti- tude, is thus by no means either novel or modern. It is that of most cautious and sagacious in- quirers. The same position was, rather vaguely, adopted by Moreau (de Tours) in his Psychologic morbide dans ses rapports, etc., published in 1859, though, as his book was prolix and badly written, his proposition has often been misunderstood. He regarded genius as a " neurosis," but he looked upon such " nevrose " as simply " the synonym of exaltation (I do not say trouble or perturba- tion) of the intellectual faculties. . . . The word 'neurosis' would indicate a particular dis- position of the faculties, a disposition still in part physiological, but overflowing those physio- logical hmits " ; and he presents a genealogical tree with genius, insanity, crime, etc., among its branches ; the common root being " the here- ditary idiosyncratic nervous state." Professor Grasset, again, more recently (La supMoriU intellectuelle el la ndvrose, 1900), while not regard- ing genius as a neurosis, considers that it is united to the neuroses by a common trunk, this trunk being a temperament and not a disease. The slight admixture of morbidity penetrating an otherwise healthy constitution, such as the present investigation suggests as of frequent occurrence in genius, results in an organization 232 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. marked by what Moreau calls a " neurosis " and Grasset a " temperament." It has been necessary to state, as clearly as may be possible, the conclusions suggested by the present study as regards the pathological relationships of genius, because, although those conclusions are not essentially novel, the question is one that is apt to call out extravagant anwers in one direction or another. The most fruitful part of our investigation seems, however, to lie not in the aid it may give towards the exact defi- nition of genius, — for which our knowledge is not sufficient, — but in the promising fields it seems to open out for the analysis of genius along definite and precise lines. The time has gone by for the vague and general discussion of genius. We are likely to learn much more about its causation and nature by following out a number of detailed lines of inquiry on a carefully objective basis. Such an inquiry, as we have seen, is difiicult on account of the defective nature of the material and the lack of adequate normal standards of comparison. Yet even with these Hmitations it has not been wholly unprofitable. It has enabled us to trace a number of conditions which, even if they cannot always be described as factors of the genius constitution, clearly appear among the influences highly favourable to its development. CONCLUSIONS. 233 Such a condition seems to be the great reproduc- tive activity of the parents, the child destined to attain intellectual eminence in many cases alone surviving. The fact of being either the youngest or the eldest child is a condition favourable for subsequent intellectual eminence ; and I may add that I could refer to numerous recent instances of large families, in which the eldest and the youngest, but no other members, have attained intellectual distinction. We have further seen that there is a tendency for children who develop genius to be of feeble health, or otherwise dis- abled, during the period of physical development. It is easy to see the significance of this influence, which by its unfavourable effects on the develop- ment of the limbs, — an effect not exerted on the head, which may thus remain relatively large, — leaves an unusual surplus of energy to be used in other directions ; at the same time the child, who is thus deprived of the ordinary occupations of childhood, is thrown back on to more solitary and more intellectual pursuits. The clumsiness and other muscular incoordinations which we have found to be prevalent, — while there is good reason to believe that they are of congenital origin, — cooperate to the same end. Again, it is easy to see how the shock of contact with a strange and novel environment, which we have 234 A STUDY OF BRITISH GENIUS. proved to be so frequent, acts as a most powerful stimulant to the nascent intellectual aptitudes. It is possible to take a number of other common peculiarities in the course of the development of genius and to show how they either serve to inhibit the growth of genius along unfruitful lines or to further it along fruitful lines. Such an investigation as the present is far from enabling us to state definitely all the determining factors of genius, or even all the conditions re- quired for its development. It suggests that they are really very numerous and that genius is the happy result of a combination of many concomi- tant circumstances, though some of the prenatal group of circumstances must remain largely out- side our ken. We are entitled to believe that the factors of genius include the nature of the various stocks meeting together in the individual and the manner of their combination, the avoca- tion of the parents, the circumstances attending conception, pregnancy and birth, the early en- vironment and all the manifold influences to which the child is subjected from infancy to youth. The precise weight and value of these manifold circumstahces in the production of genius it must be left to later investigation to determine. APPENDICES. 237 APPENDIX A. LIST OF EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. ( The names of women are italicised. ) ABBOT, G. (1562-1633) Abercromby, Sir R. (i 734-1 801) Abingion, F. (1737-1815) Adam, R. (1728- 1792) Adams, J. C. (1819-1892) Adamson, P. (1537-1592) Addison, J. (1672-1719) Adrian IV. ( 11S9) Ainsworth, H. (1571-1622) Airy, Sir G. (1801-1892) Alcuin (735-804) Alesius, A. (1500-1565) Alexander of Hales ( 1245) Alexander, W., Earl of Stirling (1S67-J640) Allen, W. (1532-1594) Amherst, J., Baron (1717-1797) Andrewes, L. (1555-1626) AnsOn, G., Baron (1697-1762) Arblay, F. d" (1752-1840) Arkwright, Sir R. (1732-1792) Ame, T. (1710-1778) Arnold, M. (1822-1888) Arnold, T. (1795-1842) Arthur, Sir G. (1784-1854) Ascham, R. (1515-1568) Atterbury, F. (1662-1732) Austen,/. (1775-1817) Austin, J. (1790-1859) BABBAGE, C. (1792-1871) Bacon, A. (1558-1601) Bacon, F., Lord Verulam (1561-1626) Bacon, Sir N. (1509-1579) Bacon, R. (I2I4?-I294) Bagehot, W. (1826-1877) Baillie, J. ( 1 762- 1 85 1 ) Baily, F. (1774- 1844) Baker, Sir S. (1821-1893) Balfe, M. W. (1808-1870) Balfour, F. (1851-1882) Bancroft, R. (1544-1610) Banim, J. (1798-1842) Banks, Sir J. (1743-1820) Banks, T. (1735-1805) Bannister, J. (1760-1836) Barbauld, A. (1743-1825) Barbour, J. (1316 ?-i395) Barclay, A. (1475 ?-i5S2) Barclay, J. (1582-1621) Barclay, R. (1648- 1 690) Barham, H. (1788-1845) Barnes, W. (1801-1886) Bamfield, R. (1574-1627) Barrow, I. (1630-1677) Barrow, Sir J. (1764- 1848) Barry, A. (1734-1801) Barry, Sir C. (1795- 1860) Barry, E. (1658-1713) Barry, J. (1741-1806) Baskerville, J. (1706-1775) Bateman, W. (1298 ?-i35S) Bates, H. W. (1825-1892) Baxter, R. (1615-1691) 238 APPENDIX. Beardsley, A. (1872-1898) Beaton, D. (1494-1546) Beaumont, F. (1584-1616) Becker, E., Lady (i 791 -1872) Beckford, W. (1759-1844) Beddoes, T. (1803-1849) Bede (673-735) Bedell, W. (1571-1642) Behn, A. (1640-1689) Bell, A. (1753-1832) Bell, Sir C. (1774-1842) Bennett, Sir W. S. (1816-1875) Benson, E. (1829- 1 896) Bentham, G. (1800-1884) Bentham, J. (1748-1832) Bentley, R. (1662-1742) Berkeley, G. (1685-1753) Bessemer, Sir H. (1813-1898) Bethell, R., Lord Westbury (1800- 1873) Betterton, T. (1635-1710) Bewick, T. (1753-1828) Bingham, J. (1668-1723) Birch, S. (1813-1885) Bishop, Sir H. (1786-1855) Black, J. (1728-1799) Blackmore, R. (1825-1900) Blackstone, Sir W. (1723-1780) Blake, R. (1599-1657) Blake, W. (1757-1827) Blow, J. (1648-1708) Boece, H. (1465 ?-iS36) Boniface, St. (680-755) Bonington, R. P. (1801-1828) Bonner, E. (1500 ?-i569) Booth, B. (1681-1733) Borrow, J. (1803-1881) Boscawen, E. (1711-1761) Eoswell, J. (1740-1795) Bowen, C, Baron (1835-1894) Bowring, Sir J. (1792-1872) Boyce, W. (1710-1779) Boyle, R., Earl of Cork (1566-1643) Boyle, R. (1627-1691) Bracegirdle, A. (1663-1748) Bradford, W. (1590-1657) Bradlaugh, C. (1833-1891) Bradley, J. (1693-1762) Bradshaw, H. (1831-1886) Bradshaw, W. (1571-1618) Bradwardine (1290 ?-l349) Broke, Sir P. (1776-1841) Brooke, Sir J. (1803-1868) Breton, N. (1545 ?-i626) Brewster, Sir D. (1781-18 Bright, J. (1811-1889) Bronte, C. (1816-1855) Bronte, E. (1818-1848) Brougham, Lord (1778-1868) Brown, F. M. (1821-1893) Browne, H. K. (1815-1882) Browne, R. (1550 ?-i633 ?) Browne, Sir T. (1605-1682) Browne, W. (i 591 -1643 ?) Browning, E. B. ( 1 806- 1 86 1 ) Browning, R. (1812-1889) Bruce, H., Baron Aberdare (1815- 1895) Bruce, J. (1730-1794) Bruce, M. (1746-1767) Buchanan, G. (1506-1582) Buckle, H. T. (1821-1862) Bull, J. (1563 ?-i628) BunyanJ. (1628-1688) Burbage, R. (1567 ?-l6i9) Burges, C. (1589-1665) Burke, E. (1729-1787) Burne-Jones, Sir E. (1833-1898) Burnet, G. (1643-1715) Burns, R. (1759-1796) Burton, Sir R. (1821-1890) Burton, R. (1577-1640) Butler, J. (1692-1752) Butler, S. (1612-1680) Butterfield, W. (1814-1900) Byng, G., Viscount Torrington (1663- 1733) Byrd, W. (1538-1623) Byron, G., Lord (1788- 1 824) CADE, J. ( 1450) Cadogan, W., Earl (1675-1726) Caedmon (/?. 670) Cairns, H., Earl (1819-1885) Caius, J. (1510-1573) Calamy, E. (1671-1732) Camden, W. (1551-1623) Campbell, Sir C. (1792-1863) Campbell, Sir G. (1824-1892) Campbell, J., Baron (1779-1861) Campbell, T. (1777-1844) Campion, E. (1540-1581) Campion, T. ( 1619) Candlish, R. (1806-1873) Canning, C, Earl (1812-1862) Canning, G. (1770-1827) Canning, S., Viscount S. de Red- clifiFe (1786-1880) EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 239 Cantelupe, St. T. de (1218 ?-l282) Canton, J. (1718-1772) Carey, W. (1761-1834) Carleton, W. (1794-1869) Carlile, R. (1790-1843) Carlyle, T. (1795-1881) Carpenter, M. (1807-1877) Carpenter, W. B. (1813-1885) Carrii^on, R. (1826-1875) Carstares, W. (1649-1715) Cartwright, T. (1535-1603) Case, T. (1598-1682) Cattermole, G. (1800-1868) Cavendish, H. (1731-1810) Cavendish, M., Duchess of Newcastle (1624 ?-i674) Cavendish, T. (1555 ?-i592) Cazton, W. (1422 ?-l49i) Cayley, A. (1821-1895) Cecil, W.,Lord Burghley (1520-1598) Centlivre, S. (1667 ?-i723) Challoner, R. 1691-1781) Chalmers, T. (1780-1847) Chantry, Sir F. (1781-1842) Chapman, G. (1559 ?-i634) Chatterton, T. (1752- 1770) Chaucer, G. (1340 ?-i400) Cheke, Sir J. (i5i4-i5S7) Cheselden, W. (1688-1752) Chesney, F. (1789-1872) Chichele, H. (1362-1443) Chichester, A. Lord (1563-1625) Childers, H. (1827-1896) Chillingworth, W. (1602-1644) Church, R. (1815-1890) Churchill, C. (1731-1764) Churchill, J., Duke of Marlborough (1650-1722) Cibber, C. (1671-1757) Gibber, S. (1714-1766) Clapperton, H. (1788-1827) Clare, J. (1793-1864) Clarke, S. (1675-1729) Clifford, W. G. (1845-1879) Clive, K. (1711-1785) Clive, R., Lord (1725-1774) Clough, A. (1819-1861) Cobbett, W. (1762-1835) Cobden, R. (1804-1865) Cockburn, Sir A. (1802-1880) Cockerell, C. (1788-1863) Coke, Sir E. (1552-1634) Colby, T. (1784-1852) Colebrooke, H. T. (1765-1837) Colenso, J. (1814-1883) Coleridge, H. (1796-1849) Coleridge, S. T. (1772-1834) Colet, J. (1467-1519) Collier, J. (1636^1726) Collins, W. (17211-17)59) Collins, W. mj>8%.i889) Colman, G., mender (1732-1794) Columba, St. (521-597) Columban, St. (543-615) Congreve, W. (1670-1729) Gonington, J. (1825-1869) Constable, J. (1776-1837) Cook, J. (1728-1779) Cooke, G. F. (1756-1811) Cooke, H. (1788-1868) Cooper, A., First Lord Shaftesbury (1621-1683) Cooper, A., Third Lord Shaftesbury (1671-1713) Cooper, Sir A. (1768-1841) Cooper, S., (1609-1672) Copley, J. S. (1737-1815) Copley, J. S., Lord Lyndhurst (1772 1863) Cosin, J. (1594-1672) Cotes, R. (1682-1716) Cotman, J. (1782-1842) Cotton, Sir A. T. (1803-1899) Cotton, C. (1630-1687) Cotton, Sir R. (1571-1631) Coutances, W. de ( 1207) Coverdale, M. (1488-1568) Cowley, A. (1618-1667) Cowley, H. (1743-1809) Cowper, W. (1731-1800) Cox, D. (1783-1859) Cozens, J. R. (1752-1799) Crabbe, G. (1754-1832) Cranmer, T. (1489-1556) Crashaw, R. (1612-1649) Creighton, M. (1843-1901) Crichton, J. (1560-1585 ?) Croker, J. W. (1780-1857) Crome, J. (1768-1821) Cromwell, O. (1599-1658) Cromwell, T. (1485 ?-l540) Cross, M. A. (1819-1880) Cruikshank, G. (1792-1878) Cudworth, R. (1617-1688) Cullen, W. (1710-1790) Curran, J. P. (1750-1817) Cuthbert, St. ( 687) 240 APPENDIX. DALRYMPLE, J., Viscount Stair (1619-169S) Dalton, J. (1766-1844) Dampier, W. (1652-1715) Danby, F. (1793-1861) Daniel, S. (1562-1619) Darwin, C. (1809-1882) Darwin, E. (1731-1802) D'Avenant, Sir W. (1606-1668) Davies, Sir J. (1569-1626) Davy, Sir H. (i778ri829) Dawson, H. (1811-1878) Day T. (1748- 1789) Deane, R. (1610-1653) Dee, J. (1527-1608) Defoe, D. (1659-1731) Dekker, T. (1570 ?-i64i ?) De Morgan, A. (1806- 1871) Dempster, T. (1579 ?-l625) Denham Sir J. (1615-1669) Denman, Lord (1779-1854) De Quincey, T. (1785-1859) D'Ewes, Sir S. (1602-1650) Dibdin, C. (1745-1814) Dickens, C. (1812-1870) Digby, Sir K. (1603-1665) Dobell, S. (1824-1874) Dobson, W. ( 1 610- 1 646) Doddridge, P. (1702-1751) Dodgson, C. (1832-1898) Dodwell, H. (1641-1711) Dolben, J. (1625-1686) Donne, J. (1573-1631) Douglas, G. (1474 ?-l522) Dowland, J. (1563 ?-i626) Doyle, R. (1824-1883) Drake, Sir F. (1540?- 1596) Drayton, M. (1563-1631) Drummond, T. (1797-1840) Drummond, W. (1585-1649) Dryden, J. (1631-1700) Dudley, J. , Duke of Northumberland (1502-1553) Du«f, A. (1806-1878) Dugdale Sir W. (1605-1686) Du Maurier, G. (1834-1896) Dunbar, W. (1465 ?-i53o ?) Duncan, A., Viscount (1731-1804) Dundas, H., Viscount Melville (1742- 1811) Dunning, J., Baron Ashburton(i73i- 1783) Duns, J. S. (1265 ?-i3o8 ?) Dunstan, St. (924-g'"' D'Urfey, T. (1653-1723) Dyce, W. (1806-1864) EASTLAKE, Sir C. (1793-1865) Eastlake, Lady (1809-1893) Edgeworth, M. (1767-1849) Edmund, St. (1170 ?-i24o) Edwardes, Sir H. (1819-1868) Edwards, A. B. (1831-1892) Eliot, Sir J. (1592-1632) EUiston, R. W. (1774-1831) Elyot, Sir T. (1490-1546) Emlyn, T. (1663-1741) Erskine, E. (1680-1754) Etheridge, Sir G. (1634-1691 ?) Etty, W. (1787-1849) FABER, F. (1814-1863) Falconer, H. (1808-1865) Fanshawe, Sir R. (1608-1666) Faraday, M. (1791-1867) Farquhar, G. (1678-1707) Faucit, H. (1817-1898) Fawcett, H. (1833-1884) Ferguson, J. (1710-1776) Fergusson, R. (1750-1774) Ferrar, N. (1592-1637) Ferrier, S. (1782-1854) Fielding, H. (1707-1754) Fitzgerald, E. (1809-1883) Fitzgibbon, J., Earl of Clare (1749- 1802) Flamsteed, J. (1646-1 7 19) Flaxman, J. (1755-1826) Fletcher, A. (1655-1716) Fletcher, J. (1579-1625) Flinders, M. (1774-1814) Flood, H. (1732-1791) Flower, Sir W. (1831-1899) Foote, S. (1720-1777) Forbes, E. (1815-1854) Forbes,;;. D. (1809-1868) Ford, J. (1586-1639 ?) Forster, W. E. (1818-1886) Fortescue, Sir J. (1394-1476 ?) Fox, C. J. (1749-1806) Fox, G. (1624-1691) Foxe, J. (1516-1587) Foxe, R. (1448 ?-i528) Francis, Sir P. (1740-181 8) Frankland, Sir E. (1825-1899) Franklin, Sir J. (1786-1847) Franks, Sir A. (1826-1897) Freeman, E. (1823-1892) EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 241 Frere, Sir B. (1815-1884) Frobisher, Sir M. (iS3S-iS94) Froude, J. A. (1818-1894) Fry, jE^fi78o-i84S) Fuller, T. (i6o8-i66i) GAINSBOROUGH, T. (1727-1788) Gait, J. (1779-1839) Gardiner, S. (1483 ?-iSS5) Gamett, H. (1555-1606) Garrick, D. (1717-1779) Gascoigne, G. (1523 ?-i579) Gaskell, E. C. (1810-1865) Gauntlett, H. (1805-1876) Gay, J. (1685-1732) Geoffrey of Monmouth (lioo ?-ii54) Gibbon, E. (1737-1794) Gibbons, O. (1583-1625) Gibson, J. (1790- 1866) Gifford, W. (1756-1826) Gilbert, Sir H. (1539 ?-l583) Gilbert, Sir J. (1817-1897) Gilbert, W. (1540-1603) Gillray, J. (1757-1815) Giialdus Cambrensis (1146 ?-l220 ?) Girtin, T. (1775-1802) Gladstone, W. E. (1809-1898) Glisson, F. (1597-1677) Godwin, M. W. (1759-1797) Godwin, W. (1756-1836) Goldsmith, O. (1728-1774) Gordon, C. G. (1833-1885) Gower, J. (1325 ?-i4o8) Graham, Sir G. (1831-1899) Graham, J.,Viscount Dundee (1649?- 1689) Grattan, J. (1746-1820) Gray, T. (1716-1771) Green, J. R. (1837-1883) Greene, R. (1560 P-I592) Grenville, G. (1712-1770) Grenville, W. Baron (17S9-1834) Gresham, Sir T. (1519 ?-iS79) Grew, N. (1641-1712) Grey, Sir G. (181Z-1898) Grocyn, W. (1446 ?-iSi9) Grosseteste, R. (1175 ?-l253) Grote, G. (1794-1871) HALE, Sir M. (1609-1676) Hales, J. (1 584- 1656) Hales, S. (1677-1761) Hall, J. (1574-1656) Hallam, H. (1777-1859) Halley, E. (1656-1742) Halliwell-Phillips, J. (1820-1889) Hamilton, A. (1646 ?-i72o) Hamilton, 8 W. (1788-1856) Hamilton, Sir W. R. (1805-1865) Hamilton, T., Earl of Haddington (1563-1637) Hamley, Sir E. (1824-1893) Hampden, J. (1594-1643) Hardinge, H., Viscount (1785-1856) Harrington. J. (1611-1677) Hartley, D. (1705-17S7) Harvey, W. (1578-1657) Hastings, W. (1732-1818) Havelock, Sir H. (1795-1857) Hawke, E., Lord (1705-1781) Hawkins, Sir J. (1532-1595) Hawkwood, Sir J. de ( 1304) Haydon, B. W. (1786-1846) Hazlitt, W. (1778-1830) Hemans, F. (1793-1835) Henderson, A. (1583 ?-l646) Herbert, A., Earl of Torrington (1647-1716) Herbert, of Cherbury, E., Lord (1583-1648) Herbert, G. (iS93-l633) Herrick, R. (1591-1674) Herschel, Sir J. (1792-1871) Heylin, P. (1600-1662) Heywood, J. (1497 ?-l58o) Hey wood, T. (1650) Hickes, G. (1642-1715) Hill, Sir R. (1795-1879) Hinton, J. (1822- 1 875) Hoadley, B. (1676-1761) Hobbes, T. (1588-1679) Hodgson, B. (1800-1894) Hogarth, W. (1697-1764) Hogg, J. (1770.1835) Holcroft, T. (1745-1809) HoU, F. (1845-1888) Hood, S., Viscount (1724-1816) Hood, T. (1799-1845) Hook, T. (1788-1841) Hook, W. (1798-1875) Hooke, R. (1635-1703) Hooker, R. (1554-1600) Horner, F. (1778-1817) Horrocks, J. (1617 ?-l64l) Hort, F. (1828-1892) Howard, J. (1726-1790) Howell, J. (1594-1666) Hubert, Walter ( 1205) 16 242 APPENDIX. Hughes, T. (1822-1896) Hume, D. (1711-1776) Hunt, L. (1784-1859) Hunter, J. (1728-1893) Hunter, Sir W. (1840-1900) Huskisson, W. (1770- 1830) , Hutcheson, F. (1694-1746) Hutton, J. (1726-1797) Hutton, R. H. (1826-1897) Huxley, T. H. (1825-1895) Hyde, E., Earl of Clarendon (1609- 1674) INCHBALD, E. (1753-1821) Ireton, H. (1611-1651) Irving, E. (1792-1834) JAMESON, A. (1794-1860) Jeffrey, F., Lord (1773-1850) Jenner, E. (1749-1823) Jerrold, D. (1803-1857) Jervis, J., Earl of St. Vincent (1735- 1823) Jevons, W. S. (1835-1882) Jewel, J. (1522-1571) John of Salisbury ( 1180) Johnson, S. (1709-1784) Johnston, A., Lord Warriston (1610 ?- 1663) Jones, I. (1573-1652) Jones, SirJ. T. (1783-1843) Jones, Sir W. (1746-1794) Jones, W. B. 1822- 1897) Jonson, B. (1573-1637) [ordan, D. (1762- 181 6) Joule, J. P. (1818-1889) Jowett, B. (1817-1893) Juxon,,W. (1582-1663) KEAN, E. (1787-1833) Keats, J. (1795-1821) Keble, J. (1792-1866) Keeley, M. A. (1805-1895) Keene, C. (1823-1891) Kelly, F. (1790-1882) Kemble, F. A. (1809-1893) Kemble, J. M. (1807-1857) Kemble, J. P. (1757-18-23) Kemp, J. (1380-1447) Ken, T. (1637-1711) Kennett, W. (1660-1728) Kenyon, L., Lord (1732-1802) Killigrew, T. (1612-1683) King, T. (1730-1805) King, W. (1650-1729) Kingsley, C. (1819-1875) Kingshy, M. (1862-1900) Kirkcaldy, Sir W. (1573) Knight, G. (1713-1772) KnoUys, Sir R. (1407) Knowles, J. S. (1784-1862) Knox, J. (1505-1572) LAKE, G., Viscount (1744-1808) Lamb, C. (1775-1834) Lambert, J. (1619-1683) Lancaster, J. (1778-1838) Lander, R. (1804-1834) Landon, L. E. (1802-1838) Landor, W. S. (1775-1864) Landseer, Sir E. (1802-1873) Lane, E. (1801-1876) Langland, W. (1330 ?-i40O ?) Langton, S. (1228) Langton, W. (1321) Lardner, N. (1684-1768) Latimer, H. (1485 ?-l555) Laud, W. (1573-1645) Law, E., Baron EUenborough (1750- 1818) Law, E., Earl of EUenborough (1790-1871) Law, J. (1671-1729) Law, W. (1686-1761) Lawes, H. (1596-1662) Lawes, Sir J. B. (1814-1900) Lawrence, Sir H. (1806-1857) Lawrence, J., Lord (1811-1879) Lawrence, S. (1698-1775) Lawrence, Sir T. (1769-1830) Layard, Sir A. H. (1817-1894) Leake, Sir T.. (1656-1720) Lee, N. (1653 ?-i692) Leech, J. (1817-1864) Lefroy, Sir J. (1817-1890) Leighton, F., Baron (1830-1896) Leighton, R. (1611-1684) Leland, J. (i5o6?-i552) Leslie, A., Earl of Leven(l582-l66i) Leslie, C. (1650-1722) Leslie, J. (1527-1596) L'Estrange, Sir R. (1616-1704) Lever, C. J. (1806-1872) Lewes, G. H. (1817-1878) Lewis, Sir G. C. (1806-1863) Lewis, J. F. (1805-1876) Lewis, W. T. (i748?-l8ii) Liddon, H. P. (1829-1890) EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 243 Lightfoot, J. B. (1828-1889) l,ilburne, J. (1614 ?-i657) LiUo, G. (1693-1739) Linacre, T. (1460 ?-i524) Lindsay, Sir D. (1490-15SS) Lingard, J. (1771-1851) Linnell, J. (1792-1882) Linton, E. L. (1822-1898) Linton, W. J. (1812-1898) Lister, J. (1786-1869) Listen, J. (1776-1846) Littleton, Sir T. (1402-1481) Livingstone, D. (1813-1873) Lloyd, J. (1627-1717) Locke, J. (1632- 1 704) Lockhart, J. (1794- 1 854) Lodge, T. (1558-1625) Loftus, A. (1533-1605) Lovelace, R. (1618-1658) Lover, S. (1797-1868) Lowe,R., Viscount Sherbrooke (1811- 1892) Lowth, R. (1710-1787) Lucas, C. (1713-1771) Ludlow, E. (1617-1692) Lydgate, J. (1370 ?-i4Si) Lyell, Sir C. (i797-i875) Lyly. J- (IS54 ?-i6o6) Lytton, E. B., Earl of (1831-1891) Lytton, E. B., Lord (1803-1873) MACAULAY, T.,Lord (1800-1859) Macdonald, Sir J. A. (1815-1891) Macfarren, SirG. (1813-1887) Mackay, H. (1640 ?-l692) Mackintosh, Sir J. (1765-1832) Mackenzie, H. (1745-1831) Macklin, C. (1697 ?-i797) Maclaurin C. (1698-1746) Maclise, D. (1806-1870) Macn^hten, Sir W. (1793-1841) Macready, W. C. (l793-i873) Maginn, W. (1793-1842) Maine, Sir H. S. (1822-1: Malcolm, Sir J. (1769-1833) Malone, E. (1741-1812) Malthus, T. (1766-1834) Manning, H. E. (1807-1892) Map, W. (/?.I200) Marlowe, C. (1564-1S93)! Marryat, F. (1792-1848) Marsh, H. (1757-1839) Marshall, S. (1594 ?-i6S5) Marston, J. (iS7S-i634) Marten, H. (1602-1680) Martineau, H. (1802-1876) Martineau, J. (1805-1900) Marvell, A. (1621-1678) Massinger, P. (1583-1640) Mathews, C. (1776-1835) Mathews, C. J. (1803-1878) Maurice, F. D. (1805-1872I Maxwell, J. C. (1831-1879) Mayow, J. (1643-1679) Mead, R. (1673-1754) Melville, A. (1545-1622) Merivale, C. (1808-1893) Middleton, C. (1683-1750) Middleton, T. (1570 ?-i627) Mill, J. (1773-1836) Mill, J. S. (1806-1873) Millais, Sir J. (1829-1896) Miller, H. (1802-1856) Milman, H. (1791-1868) Milner, I. (1750-1820) Milner, J. (1752-1826) Milton, J. (1608-1674) Mitchell, Sir T. (l792-i8SS> Mitford, M. (1787-1855) Moffat, R. (179S-1883) Monck, G., Duke of Albemarle (1608-1670) Monson, SirW. (1569-1643) Montagu, C, Earl of Halifax (1661- 1715) Montagu, E. (1720-1800) Montagu, R. (1577-1641) Moore, Sir J. (1761-1809) Moore, T. (1779-1852) More, H. (174S-1833) More, Sir T. (1478-1 535) Morgan, Sir G. O. (1826-1897) Morgan, Sir H. (1635 ?-i688) Morgan, Lady S. (1783 ?-l859) Morland, G. (1763-1804) Morland, Sir S. (1625-1695) Morley, G. (1597-1684) Morris, W. (1834-1896) Morton, T. (1564-1659) Mulready, W. (1786-1863) Mun, T. (1571-1641) Munday, A. (1SS3-1633) Mundella, A. J. (1825-1897) Munden, J. (1758-1832) Munro, Sir T. (1761-1827) Murchison, Sir R. (1792-1871) Murdock, W. (17S4-1839) 16* 244 APPENDIX. Murray, J. (1778-1843) Myers, F. W. (1843-1901) NAIRNE, C, Baroness (1766-1845) Napier, SirC. (1786-1860) Napier, Sir C. J. (1782-1853) Napier, J. (1550-1617) Napier, Sir J. (1804-1882) Napier, R. C, Lord (1810-1890) Napier, Sir W. J. P. (1785-1860) Nash, T. (1567-1601) Nasmyth, J. (1808-1890) Nasmyth, P. (1787-1831) Naylor, J. (1617 ?-i66o) Neale, E. V. (1810-1892) Neale, J. M. (1818-1866) Needham, M. (1620-167 ) Neill, J. G. S. (1810-1857) Neilson, J. (1792-1865) Neilson, L. A. (1848-1880) Nelson, H., Lord (1758-1805) Newcomen, T. (1663-1729) Newman, F. W. (1805-1897) Newman, J. H. (1801-1890) Newton, Sir L (1642-1727) Nicholson, J. (1821-1857) Northcote, J. (1746-1831) Norton, T. (1532-1584) Nott, SirW. (1782-1845) Nowell, A. (1507 ?-i6o2) Noye, W. (1577-1634) OCHTERLONY, Sir D. (1758- 1825) Ockham, W. ( 1349 ?) Ockley, S. (1678-1720) O'Connell, D. (1775-1847) Oglethorpe, J. E. (1696-1785) Oldcastle, Sir J. ( 1417) Oldfield, A. (1683-1730) Oldys, W. (1696-1761) O'Leary, A. (1729-1802) Oliphant, L. (1829-1888) Oliphcmt, M. (1828-1897) O'Neill, D. (1612-1664) Ofie, A. (1769-1853) Opie, J. (1761-1807) Ordericus Vitalis (1075-1143 ?) Otway, T. (1652-1685) Oughtred, W. (1575-1660) Outram, Sir J. (1803-1863) Owen, J. (1616-1683) Owen, Sir R. (1804-1892) Owen, R. (1771-1858) PAGET, Sir J. (1814-1899) Paget, W. Baron (1505-1563) Paine, T. (1737-1809) Paley, W. (1743-1805) Palmer, E. H. (1840-1882) Palmer, J. (1742 ?-i798) Palmer, R., Earl Selbourne (1812- 189s) Palmer, S. (1805-1881) Paris, M. ( 1259 ?) Park, M. (1771-1806) Parker, M. (1504-157S) Parker, T., Earl Macclesfield (1667- 1732) Parkes, E. A. (1819-1876) Parkes, Sir H. S. (1828-1885) Parkes, Sir H. (1815-1896) Parnell, C. S. (1846-1891) Parr, S. (1747-1825) Parsons, R. (1546-1610). Parsons, W. (1736-179S) Pater, W. H. (1839-1894) Paterson, W. (1658-1719) Patmore, C. (1823-1896) Patrick, St. (373-463) Pattison, M. (1813-1884) Payne, P. (1380 ?-i4S5) Pearson, J. (1613-1686) Pearson, J. L. (1817-1897) Pecock, R. (1395 ?-i46o ?) Peel, Sir R. (1788-1850) Peele, G. (1558 ?-i597?) Peirce, J. (1674 ?-l726) Pellew, E., Viscount Exmouth (1757- 1833) Penn, SirW. (1621-1670) Penn, W. (1644-1718) Penry (iS59-iS93) Pepys, S. (1633-1703) Perkins, W. (1558-1602) Perry, J. (1756-1821) Peters, H. (1598-1660) Petty, Sir W. (1623-1687) Phelps, S. (1804-1878) Phillip, J. (1817-1867) Picton, Sir T. (1758-1815) Pitman, Sir I. (1813-1897) Pitt, W., Earl of Chatham (1708- 1778) . Pitt, W. (1759-1806) Pococke, E. (1604-1691) Pollock, Sir G. (1786-1872) Pope, A. (1688-1744) Popham, Sir H. R. (1763-1820) EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 245 Porson, R. (1759-1808) Pott, P. (1714-1788) Powell, V. (1617-1670) Pownall, T. (1722-1802) Pratt, C, Earl Camden (1714-1794) Preston, J. (1587-1628) Prestwich, Sir J. (1812-1896) Price, R. (1723-1791) Priestley, J. (1733-1804) Prior, M. (1664-1721) Prynne, W. (1600-1669) Piigin, A. W. (1812-1852) Pulteney, W., Earl of Bath (1684- 1764) Purcell, H. (1658 ?-i695) Pusey, E. B. (1800-1882) Pym, J. (1584-1643) QUARLES, F. (1592-1644) Quin, J. (1693-1766) RADCLIFFE, A. (1764-1823) Raebum, Sir H. (1756-1823) RafiBes, Sir T. (1781-1826) Raleigh, Sir W. (1552 ?-i6i8) Randolph, T. (1605-1635) Ray, J. (1627-1705) Reade, S. (1814-1884) Reid, T. (1710-1796) Reid, SirW. (1781-1858) Reynolds, Sir J. (1723- 1792) Richardson, S. (1689-1761) Ridley, N. (1500 ?-iS5S) Ritson, J. (1752-1803) Robertson, W. (1721-1793) Robinson, H., Baron Rosmead (1824-1897) Rodney, G., Baron (l 719-1792) Roe, Sir T. (1581 7-1644) Rogers, S. (1763-1855) Romney, G. (1734-1802) Roscoe, W. (1753-1831) Rose, G. (1744-1818) Ross, Sir H. D. (1779-1S68) Ross, R. (1766-1814) Rossetti, C. (1830-1894) Rossetti, D. G. (1828-1882) Rowe, N. (1674-1718) Rowlandson, T. (1756-1827) Ruskin, J. (1819-1900) Russell, C, Baron (1832-1900) SABINE, Sir E. (17S8-1883) Sacheverell, W. (1638-1691) Sadler, M. T. (1780-1835) St. John, O. (1598 ?-i673) St. Leger, Sir A. (1496 ?-i559) Sale, Sir R. (1782-1845) Salesbury, W. (1520 ?-i6oo?) Bancroft, W. (1617-1693) Sandby, P. (1725-1809) Savage, R. ( 1743) Savile, Sir H. (1549-1622) Scarlett, J., Baron Abinger (1769- 1844) Scott, D. (1806-1849) Scott, Sir G. G. (181 1 -1878) Scott, J., Earl of Eldon (1751-1838) Scott, Sir W. (1771-1832) Scott, W., Lord Stowell (1745-1836) Scotus Erigena {A. 850) Sedgwick, A. (1785-1873) Seeley, Sir J. (1834-1895) Selden, J. (1584-1654) Shakespeare, W. (1564-1616) Sharp, J. (1645-1714) Shell, R. L. (1791-1851) Sheldon, G. (1598-1677) Shelley, P. B. (1792-1822) Sheridan, R. B. (1751-1816) Shirley, J. (1596-1666) Siddons, S. (1755-1831) Sidgwick, H. (1838-1899) Sidney, Sir P. (1554-1586) Simpson, Sir J. Y. (1811-1870) Sinclair, Sir J. (1754-1835) Skelton, J. (146- ?-i529) Smart, C. (1722-1771) Smith, A. (1753-1790) Smith, Sir H. G. (1787-1860) Smith, H. J. S. (1826-1883) Smith, R. A. (1817-1884) Smith, Sydney, (1771-1845) Smith, Sir T. (1513-1577) Smith, W. (1769-1839) Smith, W. R. (1846- 1894) Smith, Sir W. S. (1764-1840) Smollett, T. (1721-1771) Somers, J., Lord (1651-1716) Somerville, M. (1780-1872) South, R. (1634-1716) Southey, R. (1774-1843) Southwell, R. (1561 P-I595) Speke, J. (1827-1864) Spelman, Sir H. (1564 ?-i64i) Spenser, E. (1552 P-I599) Sprat, T. (1635-1713) 246 APPENDIX. Stanhope, W., Earl of Harrington (1690 P-I756) Stanley, A. P. (1815-1881) Steele, Sir R. (1672-1729) Steevens, G. (1736-1800) Stephen, Sir J. F. (1829-1894) Stephenson, G. (1781-1848) Sterne, L. (1713-1768) Stevens, A. (1818-1875) Stevenson, R. L. (1850-1894) Stewart, D. (1753-1828) Stothard, T. (1755-1834) Stow, J. (1525-1605) Street, G. E. (1824-1881) Stubbs, G. (1724-1806) Sturgeon, W. (1783-1850) Suckling, Sir J. (1609-1642) Sullivan, Sir A. (1842-1900) Swift, J. (1667-1745) Sydenham, T. (1624-1689) Symonds, J. A. (1840- 1893) TAIT, A. C. (181 1-1882) Tallis, T. (1510 ?-i585) Tarleton, Sir B. (1754-1833) Taylor, Sir H, (1800-1886) Taylor, J. (1613-1667) Taylor, W. (1765-1836) Telford, T. (1757-1834) Temple, Sir W. (1628-1699) Tennyson, A., Baron (1809-1892) Thackeray, W. M. (1811-1863) Thirlwall, C. (1797-1875) Thomas,! W. ( 1554) Thompson, W. (1785 ?-i833) Thomson, J. (1700-1748) Thurloe, J. (1616-1668) Thurlow, E., Baron (1731-1806) Tillotson, J. (1630-1694) Toland, J. (1670-1722) Tone, T. W. (1763-1798) Tooke, J. H. (1736-1812) Trelawney, E. J. (1792-1881) Trevitheck, R. (1771-1833) Trollope, A. (1815-1882) Trollope, Sir H. (1756-1839) Tunstall, C. (1474-1559) Turner, J. M. W. (1775-1851) Tye, C. (1497 ?-i572) Tyndale, W. (1490 ?-l536) Tyndall, J. (1820-1893) UDALL, N. (1505-1556) Urquhart, Sir T. (1611-1660) Ussher, J. (1581-1656) VANBRUGH, Sir J. (1663-1726) Vane, Sir H., the younger (1613- 1662) Varley, J. (1778-1842) Vaughan, H. (1622-1695) Vere, Sir F. (1560-1609) Vere, Sir H. (1565-1635) Vernon, E. (1684-1757) WAKLEY, T. (1795-1862) Walker, F. (1840-1875) Wallace, Sir W. (1272 ?-i305) Waller, E. (1606-1687) Waller, Sir W. (1597 ?-i668) Wallis, J. (1616-1703) Walpole, H., Earl of Orford (1717- 1797) Walpole, R., Earl of Orford (1676- 1745) Walsh, P. (1618 ?-l688) Walsingham, Sir F. (1530 ?-i590) Walter, J. (1739-1812) Walton, I. (1593-1683) Warburton, W. (1698-1779) Ward, M. (1585-1645) Ward, S. (1617-1689) Ward, W. G. (1812-1882) Warham, W. (1450 ?-l532) Warton, T. (1728-1790) Watson, R. (1737-1816) Watson, T. (1557 ?-i592) Watt, J. (1736-1819) Waynflete, W. of (1395 ?-l486) Webster, B. (1797-1882) Wedgwood, J. (i730-i79S) Wentworth, W. C. (1793-1872) Wesley, C. (1707-1788) Wesley, J. (1703-1791) Westmacott, Sir R. (1775-1856) Whately, R. (1787-1863) Wheatstone, Sir C. (1802-1875) Whewell, W. (1794- 1866) Whiston, W. (1667-1752) Whitbread, S. (1758-1815) White, G. (1720-1793) White, J. B. (1775-1841) Whitefield, J. (1714-1770) Whitehead, G. (1636 ?-l723) Whitelocke, B. (1605-1675) Whitgift, J. (1530 ?-i6o4) Whittington, R. ( 1423) Whitworth, Sir J. (1803-1887) EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 247 Wilberforce, S. (1805-1873) Wilberforce, W. (1759-1833) Wilde, O. (1856-1900) Wilfrid, St. (634-709) Wilkes, J. (1727-1797) Wilkie, Sir D. (1785-1841) Wilkins, J. (1614-1672) Wilks, R. (1665 ?-i732) Willet, A. (1562-1621) William of Malmesbury ( 1 143 ?) William of Newburgh (1136-1198?) Williams, Sir C. H. (1708-1759) Williams, D. (1643 ?-i7i6) Williams, Sir R. (1540 ?-l595) Williams, R. (1604 ?-i683) Williams, Sir W. (1634-1700) Williamson, Sir J. (1633-1701) Williamson, W. C. (1816-1895) Willoughby, Sir N. J. (1777-1849) Wilson, J. (1785-1854) Wilson, R. (1714-1782) Wilson, Sir R. (1777-1849) Wilson, T. (1663-1755) Windham, W. (1750-1810) Winthrop, J. (1588-1649) Winwood, Sir R. (1563 ?-i6i7) Wiseman, N. (1802-1865) Wishart, G. (1513 ?-i546) Wither, G. (i 588-1667) Woffington, M. (1714 ?-l76o) Wolcot, J. (1738-1819) Wolfe J. (1727-1759) WoUaston, W. H. (1766-1828) Wolsey, T. (1471 ?-i53o) Woodward, H. (1714-1777) Woolner, T. (1825-1892) Wordsworth, Charles (1806-1892) Wordsworth, Christopher (1807- 1885) Wordsworth, W. (1770-1850) Wotton, Sir H. (1568-1639) Wotton, N. (1497 ?-is67) Wren, Sir C. (1632-1723) Wright, J. (1734-1797) Wright, T. (1810-1877) Wulfstan, St. (1012 ?-i09S) Wyatt, Sir T. (1503 ?-i542) Wycherley, W. (i640?-i7i6) Wycliffe, J. (1324 7-1384) Wykeham, W. of (1324- 1404) Wyse, SirT. (1791-1862) YATES, M. A. (1728-1787) Yorke, P., Earl of Hardwicke (1690- 1764) Young, A. (1741-1820) Young, E. (1683-1765) Yoimg, T. (1773-1829) At various points it has been necessary to classify our eminent persons into groups, accord- ing to the character of their intellectual acti- vities. It may be convenient here to present these groupings. It should be noted that a few individuals (distinguished by an asterisk) appear in more than one hst, and that some miscellaneous persons have been omitted altogether. In a large number of cases the question of classification is difficult and remains doubtful, although a con- siderable amount of care has been exercised in such cases. Difference of opinion must also 248 APPENDIX. necessarily exist on the question of duplication and the extent to which it should be carried. The eminent women have been grouped separately. Actors. — Bannister, Betterton, Booth, Burbage, Gibber, Cooke, Elliston, Foote, Garrick, Kean, Kemble, King, Lewis, Liston, Macklin, Macready, C. Mathews, G. J. Mathews, Munden, Palmer, Parsons, Phelps, Quin, Webster, Wilks, Woodward. Artists. — Adam, Banks, C. Barry, J. Barry, Beardsley, Bewick, Blake,* Bonington, Brown, Browne, Burne-Jones, Butterfield, Gattermole, Ghantrey, Cockerell, Constable, Cooper, Copley, Gotman, Cox, Cozens, Crome, Cruik- shank, Danby, Dawson, Dobson, Doyle, Du Maurier, Dyce, Eastlake, Etty, Flaxman, Gainsborough, Gibson, Gilbert, Gillray, Girtin, Haydon, Hogarth, HoU, Inigo Jones, Keene, Landseer, Lawrence, Leech, Leighton, Lewis, Linnell, Linton, Maclise, Millais, Morland, Morris,* Mulready, Nasmyth, Northcote, Opie, Palmer, Pearson, Phillip, Pugin, Raeburn, Reynolds, Romney, Rossetti,*^ Rowlandson, Sandby, D. Scott, G. Scott, Stevens, Stot- hard. Street, Stubbs, Turner, Vanbrugh,* Varley, Walker, Westmacott, Wilkie, Wilson, Woolner, Wren, Wright. Divines. — Abbot, Adrian IV., Ainsworth, Alesius, Allen, Andrewes,* Atterbury, Bancroft, Barclay, Barrow,* Baxter, Bedell, Benson, St. Boniface, Bonner, Bradshaw, Browne, Burges, Burnet,* Butler,* Campion, Candlish, St. Thomas de Cantelupe, Carey, Cartwright, Ghalloner, Chalmers, Chichele, Chillingworth, Church, Clarke, Colenso, St. Columba, St. Columban, Cooke, Cosin, Goverdale, Cranmer, Cudworth, St. Cuthbert, Dolben, Doddridge, Donne,* Duff, St. Dunstan, St. Edmund, Emlyn, Erskine, Faber, Ferrar, Fox, Foxe,* Fuller, Garnett, Henderson,* Heylin, Hoadley, Hook, Hooker, Irving, Jewel, Jones, Juxon, Keble,* Ken, King, Knox,*Langton,* Lardner, Latimer, Laud, Law, Leighton, Leslie, Liddon, Lightfoot, Lloyd, Loftus, Manning, Marsh, Marshall, Martineau, Maurice, Melville, Middleton, Milne^jyioffat, Montague, Morley, Naylor, Neale, Newman, Nowell, Owen, Pajey,* Parker, Parsons, St. Patrick, Payne, Pearson,* Pecock, Peirce, Penry, Perkiils, Peters, Powell, Preston, Pusey, Ridley, Sancroft, Sharp, Sheldon, South, Stanley,* Tait, Taylor, Tillotson, Tyndale,* Walsh, Warham, C. Wesley, J. Wesley, Blanco White, Whitefield, Whitehead, Whitgift, Wilber- force, St. Wilfrid, Willett, D. Williams, R. Williams, Wilson, Wiseman, Wishart, Wordsworth, St. Wulfstan, Wycliffe.* Doctors. — Caius,* Cheselden, Cooper, CuUen, Linacre,* Mead, Paget, Pott, Simpson, Sydenham. (Others are included among Men of Science.') Lawyers. — Abinger, Ashburton, Austin, Blackstone, Bowen, Cairns, Camden, Campbell, Clare, Cockburn, Coke, Curran, Denman, Eldon, Ellen- borough, Fortescue, Haddington, Hale, Hardwicke, Kenyon, Littleton, Lyndhurst, Macclesfield, Maine, More,* J. Napier, Noye, Russell, St. John, Selbourne, Selden, Somers, Stair, Stephen, Stowell, Thurlow, Westbury, Williams. Men of Letters. — Addison, Alcuin, Ascham, Bagehot, Banim, Barclay, Beckford, Bede, Blackmore, Borrow, Boswell, Browne,],Buchanan,* Buckle, EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 249 Bunyan, Burton, Calamy, Camden, Carleton,CarIile, Gary le. Gibber, *Cobbett,* Collier, Wilkie Collins, Colman, Congreve, Cotton, Cowley, Groker, D'Avenant, Day, Defoe, Dekker, Dempster, De Quincey, D'Ewes, Dickens, Digby, Dodgson,*Dugdale, Elyot, Etheridge, Fanshawe, Farquhar, Fielding, Foxe, Francis, Freeman, Froude, Gait, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Gibbon, Gif- ford, Giraldus, Goldsmith, Green, Grote, Hall, Hallam, Halliwell-Phillips, Hamilton, Harrington, Hazlitt, Herbert, Holcroft, Hood, Hook, Howell, Hughes, Hume,* Hunt, Hunter, Hutton, Jeffrey, jerrold, Johnson, Jonson, Kemble,' Kennett, ICilligrew, Kingsley, Knowles, Lamb, Landor, Lee, Leland, L'Estrange, Lever, Lewes, Lillo, Lingard, Lockhart, Lodge, Lover, Lyly, Lytton, Macaulay, Mackenzie, Maginn, Malone, Map, Marryatt, Marston, Miller,* Merivale, Milman, More,* Myers, W. J. P. Napier, Nash, Needham, Newman, Oliphant, Oldys, Ordericus Vitalis, Paine, Paris, Pater, Pepys, Perry, Prynne, Raleigh,* Reade, Richardson, Ritson, Robertson, Roscoe, Ruskin, Scott, Seeley, Shell, Sheridan,* Smollett, Southey, Sprat, Sidney Smith, Stanley,* Steele, Sterne, Steevens, Stevenson, Stow, Swift, Symonds, H. Taylor, W. Taylor, Temple,* Thackeray, Thirlwall, Trelawney, TroUope, Tyndale, Udall, Urquhart, Vanbrugh,* Wakley,* H. Walpole, Walton, Warburton, Warton, Whately, Wilde, William of Malmesbury, William of Newburgh, Williams, Wilson, Wolcot, Wright, Wycherley. Men of Science. — ^Adams, Airy, Arkwright, Armstrong, Babbage, R. Bacon,* Baily, Balfour, Banks, Barrow,* Baskerville, Bates, Bell, Bentham, Bessemer, Birch, Black, Boyle, Bradley, Brewster, Canton, Carpenter, Carrington, Cavendish, Cayley, Caxton, Clifford, Colby,;Cotes, Cotton, Dalton, C. Darwin, E. Darwin, Davy, Dee, De Morgan, Dodgson,* Drummond, Falconer, Fara- day, Ferguson, Flamsteed, Flinders,* Flower, E. Forbes, J. D. Forbes, Frankland, Franks, Gilbert, Glisson, Grew, Hales, Halley, Hamilton, Harvey, Herschel, Hodgson, Hooke, Horrocks, Hunter, Hutton, Huxley, Jenner, Jevons, Joule, Knight, Lawes, Lefroy, Lister, Lyell, Maclaurin, Malthus, Mayow, Maxwell, Miller,* Milner, Morland, Mun, Murchison, Murdoch, Napier, Nasmyth, Neilson, Newcomen, Newton, Oughtred, Owen, Parkes, Petty, Priestley, Ray, Sabine,* Sadler, Sedgwick, Sidgwick, Sinclair, A. Smith, H. J. Smith, R. A. Smith, W. Smith, Stephenson, Sturgeon, Telford, Thompson, -Trevitheck, Tyndall, Wallis, Ward, Watson, Watt, Wedgwood, Wheatstone, Whewell, White, Whitworth, Wilkins, Williamson, Wollaston, A. Young, T. Young. Musical Composers.— Axne, Balfe, Bennett, Blow, Boyce, Byrd, Dowland, Gauntlett, Gibbons, Lawes, Macfarren, Purcell, Sullivan, Tallis, Tye. Philosophers.— AlsKanAex of Hales, F. Bacon, Roger Bacon,* Bentham, Berkeley, Bradwardine, Butler,* Duns, Erigena, Godwin, Hamilton, Hartley, Hinton, Hobbes, Hume,* Hutcheson, Locke, Mackintosh, J. Mill, J. S. Mill, Ockham, Paley,* Price, Raid, Shaftesbury, Stewart, Toland, Ward, Wycliffe.* Poets. — Arnold, Barbour, Barclay, Barham, Barnes, Barnfield, Beaumont, Beddoes, Blake,* Breton, Browne, Browning, Bruce, Burns, Butler, Byron, Caedmon, Campbell, Campion, Chapman, Chatterton, Chaucer, Churchill, Clare, Clough, H. Coleridge, S. T. Coleridge, Collins, Cotton, Cowper, Crabbe, Crashaw, Daniel, Davies, Denham, Dibdin, Dobell, Donne,* Douglas, Drayton, Drummond, Dryden, Dunbar, D'Urfey, Fletcher, Ford, Fergusson, Fit^erald, Gascoigne, Gay, Gower, Gray, Greene, Herbert, Herrick, J. 2SO APPENDIX. Heywood, T. Heywood, Hogg, Hood, Keats, Keble,* Langland, Lindsay, Lovelace, Lydgate, Marlowe, Marvell, Massinger, Middleton, Milton, Moore, Morris,* Munday, Norton, Otway, Patraore, Peele, Pope, Prior, Quarles, Randolph, Rogers, Rossetti,* Rowe, Savage, Shakespeare, Shelley, Shirley, Sidney,* Skelton, Smart, Southwell, Spenser, Suckling, Tennyson, Thomson, Vaughan, "Waller, Watson, Wither, Wordsworth, Wotton, Wyatt, Young. Politicians, etc. — Arthur, A. Bacon, N. Bacon, Bateman, Beaton, Bradford, Bradlaugh, Bright, Brooke, Brougham, Bruce, Burke, Burghley, Burnet,* Cade, Campbell, Canning, Earl Cannii^, Carstares, Chatham, Chichester, Childers, Clarendon, Clive, Cobbett,* Cobden, Cork, Coutances, O. Crom- well, T. Cromwell, Eliot, Ellenborough, Fawcett, Fletcher, Forster, Fox, Foxe, * Frere, Gardiner, Gladstone, Grattan, G. Grenville, W. Grenville, Grey,* Hampden, Harrington, Hastings, Henderson,* Horner, Hubert Walter, Huskisson, Ireton, Kemp, Kirkcaldy, Knox,* S. Langton, W. Langton, Law, Lawrence, Leslie, Lewis, Lilbumei Lucas, Ludlow, Lytton, Macdonald, Macnaghten, Malcolm, Marten, Melville, C. Montagu, Morgan, Mundella, Northumberland, O'Connell, Oldcastle, O'Leary, O'Neill, Paget, Sir Harry Parkes, Sir Henry Parkes, Parnell, Peel, Penn, Pitt, Pownall, Pulteney, Pym, Raffles, Reid,* Robinson, Roe, Rose, Sacheverell, St. Leger, Shaftesbury, Sherbrooke, Shell,* Sheridan,* T. Smith,* Stratford de Redcliffe, Stirling, Temple,* Thurloe, Tone, Tooke, Tunstall, Vane, Wal- lace,* Walpole, Walsingham, Warriston, Waynflete, Wentworth, Whitbread, Whitelocke, Wilberforce, Wilkes, Williamson, Windham, Winthrop, Win- wood, Wolsey, Wotton, Wykeham, Wyse. Sailors. — Anson, Blake, Boscawen, Broke, Byng, Cavendish, Cook, Dampier, Deane, Drake, Duncan, Exmouth, Flinders,* Franklin, Frobisher, Gilbert, Hawke, Hawkins, Hood, Leake, Monson, C. Napier, Nelson, Penn, Popham, Raleigh,* Rodney, Smith, St. Vincent, Trollope, Vernon, Willoughby. Scholars. — Andrewes,* Adamson, Barrow,* Bentley, Bingham, Boece, Bradshaw, Buchanan,* Caius,*Cheke, Colebrooke, Colet,-Conington, Creigh- ton, Crichton, Dodwell, Grocyn, Grosseteste, Hales, Hickes, Hort, John of Salisbury, Jones, Jowett, Lane, Lightfoot, Linacre,* Lowth, Montague, Morton, Ockley, Palmer, Pattison, Pearson,* Pococke, Porson, Salesbury, Savile, T. Smith, W. R. Smith, Spelman, Thomas, Ussher, Whiston, Wordsworth. Soldiers. — Abercromby, Amherst, Cadogan, Campbell, Dundee, Edwardes, Gordon, Graham, Hamley, Hardinge, Havelock, Hawkwood, Jones, KnoUys, Lake, Lambert, H. Lawrence, S. Lawrence, Leven, Mackay, Marlborough, Monck, Moore, Morgan, Munro, Napier of Magdala, C. J. Napier, Neill, Nicholson, Nott, Ochterlony, Oglethorpe, Outram, Picton, Pollock, Raleigh,* Reid, H. D. Ross, R. Ross, Sabine,* Sale, Sidney,* Smith, Tarleton, F. Vere, H. Vere, Wallace,* Waller, Williams, Wilson, Wolfe. Travellers. — Baker, Barrow, Bowring, Bruce, Burton, Chesney, Clapperton, Grey,* Lander, Livingstone, Mitchell, Park, Speke. EMINENT BRITISH PERSONS. 251 The women fall into the following groups : — Actresses. — Abington, Anne Barry, Elizabeth Barry, Becher, Bracegirdle, Cibber, Clive, Faucit, Jordan, Keeley, Kelly, Kemble, Neilson, Oldfield, Siddons, Woffington, Yates. Philanthropists, — Carpenter, Fry. Poets. — Baillie, Browning, Hemans, Landon, Nairne, Rossetti. Religuncs. — Ward. Traveller. — Kingsley. Women of Letters.— D' Axhlay, Austen, Barbauld, Behn, C. Bronte, E. Bronte, Cavendish, Centlivre, Cowley, Cross, Eastlake, Edgeworth, Edwards, Ferrier, Gaskell, Godwin, Inchbald, Jameson, Linton, Martineau, Mitford, Montagu, More, Morgan, Oliphant, Opie, Radcliife. Woman of Science. — Somerville. 252 APPENDIX B. ORIGINS OF BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. The significance of the place-names in the follow- ing list varies with their position. When the place-name occurs between that of the grand- father and grandmother it refers to the father (or the mother), our knowledge not going back so far as the grandparents. When the place-name comes in the centre of the page our knowledge is still more imperfect, only comprehending the fact that the eminent person's family belonged to the district in question. A query mark (?) means that the statement is fairly probable, and has been accepted in the body of the book, but is not absolutely certain. The place-names in square brackets indicate origins that are either doubtful or further back than the grandparents; no account of such origins has been taken in the summaries given in the body of the book. BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 253 Paternal Paternal Matema: I Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Abbot Surrey Abercromby Clackmatman Abington England Adam Scotland Adams Cornwall Cornwall Adamson Perth Addison Westmore- land Adrian IV. England [? Herts] Ainsworth Lancashire Yorks Airy Lincs[West- moreland and Yorks] Suffolk Alcuin Yorks Alesius Midlothian Alexander Gloucester of Hales Alexander (W.) Allen Clackmannan Lancashire Yorkshire Amherst Kent Andrewes Suffolk Anson Staffs Derbyshire Arblay, D' Shropshire France Arkwright Lancashire Armstrong Cumberland Northum- berland (?) Ame England Arnold(M.) Hants and Suffolk [Ireland] Cornwall Arnold (T.) Suffolk and Hante Ireland [Huguenot] Arthur Devon [? Cornwall] « Ascham Yorks Yorks Atterbury England Austen Kent Warwick Austin Suffolk Babbage Devon Bacon (A.) Suffolk Suffolk Essex Bacon (F.) Suffolk Suffolk Essex Bacon (N.) Suffolk Suffolk Bacon (R.) Somerset Bagehot Somerset Somerset BailUe Ayr and Lanark Baily England Baker Gloucester Middlesex 254 APPENDIX. Paternal grand- father. Paternal grand- mother. Maternal grand- father. Maternal grand- mother. Balfe Balfour Bancroft Banim Banks (J.) Banks (T.) Bannister Barbauld Yorks Barbour Barclay (A.) Barclay (J. ) Barclay (R.) Barham Barnes Barnfield Barrow (I.) Barrow (J.) Barry (A.) Barry (C.) Barry (E.) Barry (J.) Baskerville Bateman Bates Baxter Beardsley Beaton Beaumont Becher Beckford Glo'ster Beddoes Bede Bedell Behn Bell (A.) Bell (C.) Bennett Kent Benson Bentham (G.) Bentham (J.) Bentley Berkeley Bessemer Bethell Betterton Bewick Haddington Lancashire Kilkenny Lines Gloucester (?) Scotland Elgin Kent Dorset Shropshire Suffolk Lancashire Leicester Shropshire Scotland Fife Leicester Ireland Shropshire Essex Fife Lanark Hants' Yorks England Wilts ' Northum- berland Ireland England Aberdeen Scotland England France Dorset Kent Lancashire Somerset England England (?) Cork Worcester Norfolk Shropshire England England and Ireland Durham Essex Kent Holland Cambs Hants England [Huguenot] Ireland (?) England Cumberland BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 255 Fatemal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mo titer. Bingham Yorks Birch England Bishop Shropshire Black Antrim [Scotland] Aberdeen Blackmore Devon Glamorgan [and Devon & Glo'ster] Blackstone Wilts Wilts Blake (R.) Somerset Blake (W.) Dublin Blow Notts (?) Boece Forfar Boniface Devon Bonington Notts Notts Boimer England Booth Lancashire Borrow Cornwall • Norfolk [Huguenot] Boscawen Cornwall Boswell Ayr Bowen Mayo Ireland and Austria Boyle (A. Hereford Kent Earl of Cork) Boyle (Robert) Bracegirdle Hereford Kent Northants Bradford Yorks Bradlaugh Suffolk Bradley Durham Wilts Bradshaw Ireland Antrim (H.) [Cheshire and Derby] Bradshaw Lancashire (W.) Biadwardinc Hereford (?) Broke Suffolk Brooke England [? Norfolk] 1 Breton Essex Brewster Scotland Bright Warwick Bronte (C.) [Wilts] Down Cornwall Bronte (E.) Down Cornwall Brougham Brown Cumberland Fife Ayr Berwick 1 Midlothian Kent Browne(H.) 1 Norfolk 2S6 APPENDIX. Paternal grand- father. Browne (R. ) Browne (T.) Browne(W.) Browning (E.) Browning Dorset (R.) Bruce (H.) Paternal grand- mother. Maternal grand- father. Bruce (J.) Bruce (M.) Buchanan Buckle Bull Bunyan Burbage Burges Burke Burne-Jones Burnet Burns Burton West- (Richard) moreland Lines Cheshire Devon Glamorgan [and Scot- land] ! Stirling Herts Sussex Stirling Bedford Herts Dublin Wales Aberdeen Kincardine Northum- berland Kinross Somerset Somerset Germany Maternal grand- mother. Scotland Stirling Haddington Yorks Bedford Burton (Robert) Butler (J.) Butler (S.) Butterfield Byng Byrd Byron Cade Cadogan Caedmon Cairns Caius Calamy Camden Campbell (C.) Campbell (G.) Campbell (J.) Leicester Kent Ireland [and French Huguenot] Dumfries Herts Ireland England s Ayr Ayr Scotland Cornwall Ireland [Somerset] Down [Scot- land] France Staffs Lanark Fife Suffolk Berks Worcester England Lincoln (?) Ireland (?) Yorks Norfolk Aberdeen Lanes Cumber- land Argyle Fife Scotland BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 2s; FatemaJ 1 Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Campbell Argyle Argyle (T.) Campion Essex (E.) Campion Essex Essex (T.) Candlish Ayr Ayr Canning (C.) Londonderry [Wilts] Canning(G.) Wilts and Londonderry Canning (S.) Wilts and Londonderry Cantelupe Bucks France Canton Gloucester Carey Northants Carleton Tyrone[Iion- donderry] Tyrone Carlile Devon Carlyle Dumfriess Carpenter Worcester Worcester (M.) Carpenter Camngton Worcester Worcester Middlesex Carstares Lanark Ayr Cartwright Herts Case Kent Cattermole Norfolk Cavendish England (H.) Cavendish Essex (M.) Cavendish Suffolk (T.) Caxton Kent Cayley Yorks Cecil [Norfolk] Northants Lincoln Centlivre Lincoln Norfolk Challoner Sussex Chalmers Fife Chantrey Yorks Chapman Chatterton Gloucester Herts Gloucester Chaucer Suffolk. Cheke [? Essex] Hants^ Cambs Cheselden Rutland 17 258 APPE NDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grana- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Chesney Antrim [Scotland] Chichele Northants{?) Chichester Devon Devon Childers England [partly Jewish both sides] Chillingworth Oxford Church Yorks Germany England Churchill (C.) Churchill Cibber (C.) England Scotland (?) Dorset Devon Denmark Rutland Cibber (S.) England Clapperton Dumfriess Clare Northants Clarke Norfolk Clifford Devon Clive (K.) Kilkenny England Clive (R.) Shropshire Lanes Clough Denbigh Yorks Cobbett Surrey Cobden Sussex Cockburn Berwick France Cockerell Somerset Coke Norfolk Colby Wales Colebrooke , England Colenso Cornwall Coleridge Devon Gloucester (H.) Coleridge (S.) Colet Devon Bucks Norfolk Collier Cambs Collins (W.) Sussex Collins (W. Wicklow Scotland W.) Colman Ei^land Columba Ireland (Connaught) Ireland (Leinster) Columban Ireland (Leinster) Congreve Staffs Conington Lines Constable Suffolk [Yorks] Suffolk Cook Northumber- land (?) BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 259 Paternal Paternal graud- grand- fother. mother. Cooke (G.) England (?) Cooke (H.) Down [England] Cooper(First Hants LordShaf- tesbury) Cooper(Third Lord) Cooper (Ast- ley) Cooper (S.) Norfolk Copley(J.S.) Yorks and Limerick Copley (Lord Limerick Clare Lyndhurst) Cosin Norfolk Cotes Cotman Cotton (A.) Cheshire Cotton (C.) Staffs Cotton (R.) [Cheshire] Contances Coverdale Cowley (A.) Cowley (H.) Devon Cowper Herts Cox Warwick Cozens Russia Kent Crabbe Suffolk Cranmer Lines and Notts Crawshaw Yorks Creighton Cumberland Criehton Dumfriess Croker Devon Crome Cromwell Glamorgan (O.) and Hunts Cromwell Notts (T.) Cross Flint Cruikshank Midlothian Cudworth CuUen Lanark Curran Cumberland and Cork Cuthbert Dalrymple Ayr Dalton Cumberland Maternal grand- father. Maternal grand- mother. England England Norfolk Cornwall , Yorks England Norfolk England Scotland (?Lothians) Scotland (?) [Scotland] Dorset Lanes and Clare England (?) Norfolk Leicester Essex Derby Leicester Norfolk Warwick Suffolk Lines Cumberland Fife Galway Cambs (?) Derby (?) Cumberland 17* 26o J. \PPE NDIX. Paternal 1 Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Dampier Somerset [? Huguenot] Danby Wexford Daniel Somerset Darwin (C. ) Lincoln Staffs Cheshire Darwin (E.) 1 Lincoln [Norfolk. and Notts] Davenant Oxford Davies Wilts Wilts Davy Cornwall [Norfolk] Dawson Notts Day England Deane Qloucester Bucks (?) Dee Radnor England (?) Defoe Flanders (?) and Northants Dekker England De Morgan England Dempster Aberdeen Scotland Denham England Ireland Denman Notts Scotland De Quincey Lancashire D'Ewes Holland [ Cambs Dorset Kent Dibden Hants Dickens Hants Digby Rutland Bucks Dobell ' Kent Dobson Herts Doddridge Devon Germany Dodgson England Dodwell Yorks (?) Dolben Denbigh Carnarvon' Donne England [and Wales?] Douglas Scotland Dowland England Doyle Dublin [England ?] Drake Devon Drayton Warwick Drummond (T.) Drummond Midlothian Midlothian Midlothian (W.) Dryden Cumberland and Northants Northants Dudley Sussex Duff Perth Dugdale Lancashire BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 261 Fatemal Paternal Maternal 1 Maternal giand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Du Maurier France England Dunbar Haddii^ ton (?) Duncan Perth Dundas Ross Dunning Devon Devon Duns Northum- berland [or Bewick Dunstan Somerset(?) D'Urfey France Hunts Dyce Aberdeen Aberdeen Eastlake Devon Devon (C.) Eastlake Lancashire Norfolk (Lady) Edgeworth Longford Germany Oxford [England] Edmund Berks Edwardes Shropshire [Wales] Edwards Suffolk Ireland and Norfolk Eliot Cornwall EUiston Suffolk Elyot Somerset Emlyn Rutland (?) Kent Erskine Berwick Orkney Etheridge Oxford Etty Yorks Yorks Faber [Huguenot] Yorks Falconer Elgin Fanshawe Derby Kent Faraday Yorks Farquhar Ireland Faucit England France Fawcett Westmore- land Wilts (?) Ferguson Banff Fergusson Aberdeen Aberdeen Ferrar Cheshire Ferrier Renfrew Forfar Fielding Warwick Somerset Somerset Fitzgerald Ireland (?) Ireland Fitzgibbon Limerick Flamstead Derby Flaxman Norfolk Fletcher Haddington (A.) Fletcher (J.) Norfolk 262 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- * grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Flinders Lincoln Flood Ireland Flower Herts Warwick Foote Cornwall Forbes (C.) Isle of Man L Isle of Man Forbes (J.) Aberdeen Perth Ford Devon Devon Forster Norfolk Fortescue Devon (?) Fox(C. T.) Wilts Lincoln Fox (G.) Leicester Foxe (T.) Lincoln Foxe (R.) Lincoln Francis Ireland Frankland Lancashire Franklin Lincoln [Norfolk] Franks Worcester Norfolk Freeman Warwick Warwick Frere Norfolk [Suffolk] Surrey Frobisher Yorks [Wales] Froude Devon Cumberland Fry Norfolk Fuller [? Berks] Essex Surrey [and Suf- folk] Gainsboro' Suffolk Gait Ayr Gardiner Suffolk Garnett Derby Garrick France Ireland Gascoigne Beds Yorks Gaskell Berwick Lancashire Gauntlett Wilts Glamorgan Gay Devon Geoffrey Monmoutl: 1 Gibbon Kent and Shropshire [Suffolk] Gibbons Cambridgf :,(?) Gibson Carnarvon Wales Gifford Devon Devon Gilbert (H.) Devon Gilbert (J.) Derby Gilbert (W.) Suffolk Gillray Lanark Giraldus England Wales Girtin England Gladstone Midlothian Midlothian Ross BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 263 Fatemal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Glisson Dorset Godwin Ireland England (?) Ireland (M.) Godwin (W.) Goldsmith Cambs(?) Ireland Ireland [England] Gordon Scotland I England England Gower Suffolk [or Kent] Graham (G.) Cumberland Yorks Graham (j.) Kincardine Grattan Dublin Gray Bucks Green Oxford Oxford Greene Norfolk Grenville Bucks (G.) Grenville (W.) Gresham Bucks Norfolk (?) Norfolk Northampton Grew Warwick Notts Grey England [Leicester] Grocyn Wilts Grosseteste Suffolk Grote Germany Lincoln [Flemish [French Huguenot] Huguenot] Hale Gloucester Hales (G.) Somerset Hales (S.) Kent Herts Hall Leicester Hallam Lines Halley Derby Halliwell- PhiUips Lancashire Hamilton Ireland and (A.) Hamilton Scotland T/anark Lanark (W.) Hamilton Ireland Wigton Ireland (?) (W. R.) [Scotland] Hamilton Berwick (T.) Hamley Cornwall Shetland Hampden Bucks Hunts Hardinge Harrington Hartley Lines Kent Northants Yorks (?) 264 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Harvey Kent Kent Hastings Worcester Havelock Durham [Lincoln] Durham Hawke Cornwall Yorks Yorks Hawkins Cornwall Devon Cornwall Hawkwood Essex Haydon Devon Hazlitt Antrim Cambs Hemans Sligo Italy Lancashire Henderson Fife Herbert (A.; 1 Montgomery England (?) Herbert Montgomery Shropshire (E.) [Monmouth] Herbert Montgomery Shropshire (G.) [Monmouth] Herrick Leicester Herschel Germany Ei^land Heylin Montgomery Kent Heywood (J.) England He)rwood Lincoln (T.) Hickes Yorks Yorks Hill Worcester Hinton Oxford and Bucks [and Essex] Hoadley England Hobbes Wilts (?) Wilts Hodgson Cheshire Lancashire Hogarth Westmore- land Hogg Selkirk Holcroft England Holl Germany England Hood (S.) Somerset Dorset Hood (T.) Scotland Hook (T.) Norfolk Hook (W.) Norfolk Aberdeen Hooke England Hooker Devon Horner Midlothian Horrocks Lancashire Hort Ireland [and Somerset and Hants] England [? Suffolk] Howard Howell Hubert Wales Suffolk [or Norfolk] England Wales BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 265 Fatemal Fatemal grand- grand- father. mother. Hughes Hume Berwick Hunt Hunter (J.) Ayr Hunter (R.) Roxburgh Huskisson Staffs Hutcheson Ayr Ireland Hutton (J.) Midlothian Hutton(R.) Ireland (?) Huxley Warwick [? Staffs] Hyde Cheshire Inchbald Suffolk Ireton Derby Irving Dumfriess [Fr. Hu- guenot] ameson Dublin Jeffrey Midlothian enner Glo'sterC?) ]errold ]ervis Staffs Jevons Staffs Jewel Devon John of Salis- bury Johnson Staffs Johnston Dumfriess , ones (I.) Denbigh (?) ones (J. Suffolk and T.) Norfolk Jones (W.) Anglesey Jones (W. Cardigan B.) Jonson Dumfriess(?) Jordan Joule Derby Jowett [Yorks] Yorks Juxon Kean Ireland Keats Devon [or Cornwall] Keble Gloucester [Suffolk] Keeley Keene Suffolk Kelly Kemble(F.' Dublin 1 Herefo: Westmeath rd Ireland England Wilts England Suffolk Maternal grand- father. I Yorks England Lanark Roxburgh Staffs Armagh (?) Notts Wilts Wilts Dumfriess Lanark Gloucester Maternal grand- mother. Staffs and Cheshire Lancashire Lancashire Worcester Ayr England Essex England (?) Ireland Lancashire Lancashire Scotland [& Hants ?] France Suffolk England Switzerland 266 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. motlier. father. mother. Kemble (J.) Hereford Ireland France Switzer- land Kemble Q. Hereford Ireland P-) [? Wilts] Kemp Kent Ken [Somerset ?] Middlesex Kennett Kent Kent Kenyon Flint Cheshire Killigrew Cornwall Norfolk King (T.) England King (W.) Aberdeen Kingsley(C.) Devon Kingsley Devon (M.) Kirkcaldy Fife Fife Knight England KnoUys Cheshire Knowles Dublin Cork Knox Haddington Lake Middlesex Lamb Lincoln Herts Lambert Yorks Lancaster England Lander Cornwall Landon Hereford Wales Landor Staffs Warwick Landseer Lincoln Lane Hereford Suffolk (?) Langland Shropshire (?) Langton (S.) England Langton Leicester (W.) Lardner Hants Latiiner Leicester Law (E., Westmore- Cumberland Baron land EUenboro') Law (E., West- Cumberland Earl of 1 moreland EUenboro') Law (J.) Edinburgh Law (W.) Northampton Lawes (H.) Wilts (?) LawesQ.B.) Herts Oxford Lawrence Londonderry Donegal (H.) [Scotland] Lawrence Londonderry Donegal (J-) [Scotland] Lawrence Hereford (S.) BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 267 Paternal Paternal Maternal I Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Lawrence Worcester (T.) Layard [Huguenot] Kent Leake Suffolk Lee England [Herts or Leicester ?] Leech Ireland Lefroy England [Huguenot] Leighton Yorks Middlesex (F-) [Shropshire] Leighton (R.) Leland Forfar Lancashire Leslie (A.) Aberdeen Perth Leslie (C.) Aberdeen Leslie (J.) Aberdeen L'Estrange Norfolk Norfolk Lever Lancashire Ireland [England] Lewes Wales Lewis (J.F.) Germany England (?) Lewis(G.C.) Radnor Hereford Lewis (W. Wales T.) ■ Liddon Hants (?) Surrey Lightfoot Yorks Northumber- land Lilbume Durham Lillo Holland England Linacre Kent(?) Lindsay Haddington Lingard Lincoln Linnell Bucks [? Northants] Linton (E.) Norfolli : Norfolk Linton (W.) Aberdeen Lister Yorks (?) Listen England(?) Littleton Devon Livingstone Inverness Lanark Lloyd Anglesey Locke Somerset Somerset Lockhart Lanark Midlothian Lodge Shropshire Northants Loftus Yorks Lovelace Kent Lover Dublin Lowe Worcester 268 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Matema Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Lowth [Lines and Hunts] Dorset Lucas Clare Ludlow Wilts Somerset Lydgate Suffolk Lyell Forfar Yorks Lyly Kent Lytton (Earl of) Lytton I Norfolk Herts Ireland Norfolk Herts (Lord) Macaulay Argyll Gloucester Macdonald Sutherland Macfarren Lanark Mackay Sutherland Ross Mackintosh Inverness Mackenzie Midlothian Nairn Macklin Down (?) Westmeath (?) Maclaurin Argyll Maclise Elgin Cork [Scotland] Macnaghten Antrim Tyrone Macready Dublin Lincoln and Derby Maginn Cork Maine Roxburgh Berks Malcolm Fife and Dumfriess Dumfriess Malone Westmeath Essex Malthus Surrey Manning Herts Map Hereford and Wales Marlowe Kent Kent J?) Marryatt England [Huguenot] Germany Marsh England Marshall Hunts Marston Shropshire Italy Marten Berks Martineau Norfolk Northum- (H.) [Huguenot] berland Martineau Norfolk Northum- (J-) [Huguenot] berland Marvell Yorks Massinger Wilts Mathews (C.) Mathews Glamori jan England (?) England [C. J.) [Glamorgan] BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 269 PatemaJ I Fatemal grand- grand- tather. mother. Maurice Wales Maxwell Midlothian Mayow Mead Bucks Melville Forfar Merivale Devon [North- Germany ants, Notts & France] Middleton (C.) Middleton (T.) Mill (J.) Forfar MiU (J. S.) Forfar Forfar Millais Jersey [France] Miller Cromarty(?) Milman Devon Devon Milner (I.) Yorks Milner (J.) Lancashire Milton Oxford Mitchell Stirling Mitford Northum- berland Moffat Monck Devon Monson Lines Montagu Northants (C.)- Montagu - Yorks (E.) Montagu (R.) Moore (J.) Stirling Moore (T.) Kerry More(H.) Norfolk and Suffolk More (T.) Herts (?) Morgan Wales (G. 0.) Morgan (H.] 1 Glamorgan Morgan (S.J Mayo Morland Berks (?J: ,(G.) Morland(S.) Morley Maternal grand- father. Cornwall Yorks (?1 England England England Maternal grand- mother. Norfolk Northum- berland Norfolk Forfar Devon Forfar England England Ross Gloucester Hants Haddington Devon Lines Lines Cambs and Kent Lanark Wexford Gloucester [Beds ?] Sweden (?) [Huguenot & England] Shropshire England Ireland' 270 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Morris Worcester Notts Worcester [from Welsh Border] Morton Yorks Mulready Clare Mun England Munday Staffs (?) Mundella Italy Wales Munden England Munro Lanark Murchison Ross Ross Murdock Ayr Murray Edinburgh [Perth] Myers Yorks Cumberland Nairne Perth Perth Napier (C.) Stirling Lanark (?) Napier (C. Scotland Dublin [France] J-) < Napier (J.) Midlothian Napier (Sir J-) Napier (R. Antrim Antrim Scotland (PJ c.) Napier fW. Scotland Dublin [France] J- P.) Nash Hereford [? Suffolk] Nasmyth(J.) Midlothian Midlothian Nasmyth (P.) Midlothian Midlothian Naylor Yorks NeaIe(E.V.)Berks Warwick Neale (J. M.) Staffs Essex Needham Derby Oxford Neill Ayr Neilson (J.) Lanark Neilson (L. A.) Nelson England Norfolk Suffolk and Norfolk Newcomen Devon [Lines] Newman Cambs [Huguenot] (F.) [Holland] Newman Cambs [Huguenot] (J-) [Holland] Newton Lincoln [English family in Haddington ] Rutland BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 271 Paternal Paternal grand- grand- father. mother. Nicholson Down Northcote Devon Norton ' Nott Hereford Nowell Lancashire Noye Cornwall Ochterlony Forfar Ockham Ockley Norfolk O'Connell Kerry Oglethorpe Vorks Oldcastle Hereford [and Wales] Oldfield Oldys Dorset and Gloucester O'Leary Oliphant Oliphant Perth Midlothian (M.) O'Neill Tyrone Opie (A.) Suffolk Opie (J.) Cornwall Ordericus France Otway [Yorks ?] Oughtred Northum- berland Outram Derby Owen (J.) Wales Owen (Sir Bucks R.) Owen (R.) Mont- gomery Paget (J.) Norfolk Paget (W.) Staffs Paine Norfolk Paley Yorks Palmer (E. Cambs H.) Palmer (J.) Palmer .(R.) Leicester and Essex Palmer (S.J Devon [orWilts] Paris Park Selkirk Parker-(M.i] i Norfolk Parker (T.) Staffs Maternal grand- father. Maternal grand- mother. Surrey (?) England Cork England Antrim Bucks Norfolk Lancashire Cork Tipperary [Highlands] Fife Norfolk Cornwall England Aberdeen Lancashire [Huguenot] Wales Cheshire England England Norfolk Yorks Norfolk and Scotland [Highlands] Yorks Cheshire 272 APPENDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grmid- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Parkes (E.) Warwick Parkes (H. Staffs Shropshire s.). Parkes (H.) Warwick Parnell Queen's County [United States] Parr Leicester France Parsons (R.i) Somerset Parsons(W.) Kent Pater Bucks and Nor- folk [Flanders] Paterson Dumfriess Patmore England [& Germany] Scotland Patrick Dumbarton Pattison Vorks Yorks Payne France Lincoln (?) Pearson (J). Westmore- land Merioneth £or Carnar- von] Pearson [T- Durham L.) Pecock Wales Peel Lancashire [Yorks] Peele Devon (?) Peirce England Pellew Cornwall Penn(SirW.i Gloucester [or Wilts] Yorks Penn (W.j Glo'ster Yorks Holland Penry Brecknock Pepys Cambs Perkins Warwick Perry Aberdeen Peters Cornwall Cornwall Petty Hants Phelps Somerset Phillip Aberdeen Picton Pembroke Pitman Wilts Pitt (Earl of Dorset Elgin Waterford Chatham) Pitt (W.) ] Dorset Waterford Bucks Pococke Hants Pollock Berwick England Pope Hants (?) Yorks Popham [Devon ?] Ehgland BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 273 ^ Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. lather, mother. Porson Norfolk Norfolk Pott England Powell Radnor Montgomery Pownall Cheshire [&Lincoln] Pratt Oxford [Devon] CarnarTon Preston Northants Prestwich Shropshire [Lanes. & Ireland] Shropshire Price Glamorgan Yorks Priestley Yorks Prior Dorset Somerset Prynne Glo'ster and Sc merset [Shroj shire?] 1- )- 1 Pugin France England Pulteney Leicester Purcell Shropshire Pusey Norfolk Walloon Huguenot] Pym Somerset Kent Quarles Essex Quin Dublin Radcliffe Rutland [Holland] Nottingham [or Essex] Raeburn Dumfries Raffles Yorks Raleigh Devon [and Cornwall] Devon Randolph Sussex Northants Ray Essex Reade Oxford Reid (T.j Aberdeen Banff Reid (W.), Aberdeen Reynolds Devon [and Holland] Devon Richardson Surrey Ridley Northum- berland Ritson Robertson Westmore- land Fife Ayr Robinson West- Kilkenny meath 18 274 APPENDIX. Paternal I Paternal Maternal Materlial gramd- grand- grand- grand- fatlier. mother. father. mother. Rodney Somerset Roe Essex Norfolk Rogers Wales [& France] Cheshire Romney Westmore- land Cumberland Roscoe Lancashire Rose Nairn Ross(H.D.) Wigton Haddington Ross (R.) Down Cork Rossetti(C.) Italy Italy England Rossetti(D.G.) Italy Italy England Rowe Devon Beds Rowlandson England Ruskin Midlothian Russell Dovifn Antrim Sabine Kent Shropshire Sacheverell Notts ' Derby & Leicester Sadler Warwick & Derby [Huguenot] St. John Beds Beds St. Leger Kent Kent Sale Hunts Salesbury Denbigh Bancroft Suffolk Suffolk Sandby Notts Savage England Savile Yorks Scarlett England Scott i,V.) Lanark Scott (G.G.) 1 Lincoln Scott (J.) Northum- berland Northum- berland Scott (Walter) Midlothian Scott (William) Northum- Northum- berland berland Scotus Ireland Sedgwick Yorks Seeley Bucks Selden Sussex Kent Shakespeare Warwick Warwick Sharp Yorks Shell Kilkenny Tipperary Sheldon Staffs Shelley Sussex Surrey Sheridan Cavan England Shirley England Siddons Hereford [? Wilts] Ireland BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 275 Paternal Paternal ^ Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Sidgwick Yorks Si(^ey Sussex Simpson Linlithgow [Huguenot] Sindair Caithness Skelton Norfolk (?) Smart Durham Radnor Smith (A.) Aberdeen Fife Smith (H, Cambs Northamp- G.) ton Smith (H. J. England (?) Cork S.) Smith (R. a: 1 Ayr Lanark Smith (S.) England France Smith (T.) Essex Lancashire Smith (W.) Orford Gloucester Smith (W, Aberdeen R-)' Smith (W. s.) Smollett England Dumbar .. Dumbarton ton Worcester Somers Worcester Scotland Somerville Surrey [Yorks] South Kent Southey Somerset Hereford Southwell Norfolk Sussex Speke Somerset Norfolk Spelman Norfolk _ Surrey Spencer Lancashire Sprat Dorset Dorset Stanhope Derby Derby Stanley Cheshire Steele Dublin Dublin [or Wexford] Steevens England Stephen Aberdeen Dorset (?) Stephenson Scotland (?) and Northum- berland North - urabei ■- land Sterne Notts Ireland [Suffolk] & Yorks Stevens Dorset Dorset Stevenson Lanark Midlothian Mid- _ Ayr lothia" Stewart Bute Ayr Stothard Yorks Shropshire J 8* 276 appe: NDIX. Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father, mother. Stow England Street Worcester Stubbs Lanes. J?) Sturgeon Dumfriess Lanes. Suckling Norfolk Sullivan Ireland Italy Swift Vorks Hereford Leicester Sydenham Dorset [Somerset] Symonds Shrop- Oxford [Lancashire shire [Wales] & Yorks] Tait Aberdeen & Midlothian Tallis England [? Essex] Tarleton Lanes. Lanes. Taylor (H.) Northum- berland Durham Taylor (J.) Gloucester & Cambs Taylor (iW.)' Norfolk Norfolk Telford Dumfriess Temple Warwick & Derby Lanes. :(?)& Surrey Tennyson Lincoln Lincoln Thackeray Yorks Wilts Thirlwall Northum- berland Radnor Thomas Radnor (?.) Thompson Cork Thomson Roxburgh Berwick Thurloe Essex i?) Thurlow Norfolk Suffolk Tillotson Cheshire Yorks Toland London- derry Tone Kildare Tooke England Trelawney Cornwall Cornwall Trevitheck Cornwall Cornwall Trollope (A.) Lincoln Holland Trollope(H.j Lincoln Tuns tall Lanes. Yorks Pi Turner Devon Notts il] Tye England Tyndale Gloucester Tyndall Carlow [Glo'ster] BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 277 Paternal Paternal Maternal Maternal grand- grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. mother. Udall Hants Urquhart Cromarty Ussher Ireland [England] Vanbrugh Flanders England [Hugn( 5. not] Vane Kent Kent Essex Varley Lincoln [or Notts] Yorks Vaughan Brecknock Vere (F.) Essex Essex Vere (H.) Essex Essex Vernon Cheshire & Staffs Wakley Devon Walker England Wallace Renfrew Ayr and Ayr [? Shrop- shire] Waller (E.) Bucks Waller (W.) Kent Wallis Northants Kent Walpole(H.)Norfolk Suffolk Kent Walpole(R.; 1 Norfolk Suffolk Walsh Kildare Walsingham Kent [Nor- folk] Herts Walter England Walton Staffs Warburton Cheshire Ward (M.) Yorks Yorks Ward (S.) Herts Ward(W.G.) England Warham Hants Warton Surrey Watson (R.) Westmore- land Watson (T.) England Watt Aberdeen & Renfrew Lanark Waynflete Lincoln [? & Essex] Webster Wedgwood Yorks Staffs Yorks Shropshire Wentworth Armagh Wesley (C.) Devon[& : Staffs Warwick Ireland; I 278 APPENDIX. Paternal graud- ^ther. Wesley (J.J Devon[& Ireland] Westmacott Paternal grand- mother. Staffs Maternal grand- father. Maternal grand- mother. Whately Surrey [and Oxford ?] England Warwick Herts Wheatstone Gloucester Whewell Lancashire Whiston England Whitbread Beds Bucks White (G.) Hants Sussex White ( J. B. ) Waterf ord Spain [Dublin] Whitefield Gloucester Whitehead Westmore- land Whitelocke Bucks Whitgift Lincoln Whittington Glo'ster }?) Whitworth Yorks and Lancashire Wilberforce Yorks Oxford Warwick (S.i Wilberforce Yorks Oxford m-i Wilde Ireland Galway [Durham] Wilfrid England Wilkes Beds Wilkie Midlothian Fife Wilkins Oxford Cheshire Wilks Worcester & Dublin WiUet England William of France Somerset (?i Malmesbury William of Yorks Newburgh Williams Mon- ,(C. H.) mouth [Worces ter] Williams Denbigh Denbigh ,(D.) Williams Monmouth (Sir R.) Williams Wales ((?J ,(R.), Williams Anglesey Denbigh (W.J BRITISH PERSONS OF ABILITY. 279 Paternal Paternal Maternal I Maternal grand. grand- grand- grand- father. mother. father. ' mother. Williamson (JO Williamson Yorks England Yorks Had- Yorks (W. C.) dington Willoughby Notts Perth Wilson (J.) Renfrew Wilson (R.) Flint Wilson (Sir Yorks R.) Wilson (T.) Cheshire Windham Norfolk Essex Winthrop Suffolk Suffolk Winwood Northants Wiseman Waterford Kilkenny [settled! in Spain] AVishart Forfar Wilton Hants [Lan- cashire] Wo£Sngton Ireland Wolcot Devon Wolfe Ireland [Wales] Yorks WoUaston Staffs [? & French Huguenot] Wolsey Suffolk Woodward England Woolner Suffolk Wordsworth Yorks Warwick Glo'ster (Charles) [Mont- gomery) Wordsworth Yorks Warwick Glo'ster (Christopher) [Mont- gomery) Wordsworth Yorks (W.) Wotton (H.) Kent Kent Wotton (N.) Kent Wren Warwick Wilts [Durham] Wright (J.) Derby Wright (T.) Yorks Wulfstan Warwick Wyatt Kent (?) Surrey Wycherley Shropshire Wycliffe Yorks Wykeham Hants Wyse Waterford Waterford 28o Paternal grand- father. Yates Yorke Young (A.) Young (E.) Young (T.) Wilts Suffolk Somerset APPENDIX. Paternal grand- mother. Maternal grand- father. Maternal grand- mothe England (?) England Kent Holland Somerset 28l APPENDIX C. OCCUPATION OR SOCIAL POSITION OF FATHERS. ABBOT . clothworker Abercromby . upper class Abir^ton s oldier cobbler Adam . architect Adams . . fanner Adamson . baker Addison . . Church Airy . collector of excise Alexander . upper class Allen . . upper class Andrewes . merchant and sea captain Arblay, D' . . musician and author Arkwright . humble Ame . upholsterer Armstrong . corn merchant Arnold (M.) . schoolmaster Arnold (T.) . collector of customs Arthur . . official Ascham . . yeoman Atterbury . Church Austen . . Church BACON (A.) . upper class Bacon (F.) . upper class Bacon (N.) . sheepreeve Bacon (R.) . upper class Bagehot . . banker Baillie . . minister * • ** Minister " is here thranghout applied to all religious denominationa except the Church of England. " Priest " has refer- ence totheBoman Catholic Church, whether before or since the Bef ormation. Baily . Baker Balfour . Bancroft Banim Banks (T.) Bannister Barbauld Barclay (J.) Barclay (R.) Barnes . Barnfield Barrow (I.) Barrow (J.) Barry (A.) Barry (C.) Barry (E.) Barry (J.) Baskerville Bates Baxter . Beardsley Beaumont Beckford Beddoes . Bedell . Becher . Behn . Bell (A.) Bell (C.) Bennett . Benson . Bentham (G.) Bentham (J.) Bentley . Bessemer . banker . merchant . upper class . upper class farmer trader steward surveyor . actor . Church . lawyer . army . farmer . upper class . draper . peasant . apothecary . stationer . lawyer . builder . humble . manufacturer . yeoman . brewery mana- ger upper class lawyer upper class commerce . doctor . yeoman . actor . barber . barber . Church . musiciari . manufacturer . naval architect . lawyer . yeoman . engineer 282 APPENDIX. Bethell . doctor Campbell (G.) upper class Betterton cook Campbell (J.) minister Bewick . farmer Campbell (T.) trade Birch . Church Campion (E.) bookseller Bishop . merchant Candlish doctor Black . wine merchant Canning (C.) . upper class Blackmore Church Canning (G.) . upper class Blackstone silk mercer Canning (S.) . banker Blake (R.) . merchant Cantelupe upper class Blake (W.) . hosier Canton . business Bonington governor of Carey schoolmaster gaol Carleton peasant farmer Bonner . priest (?) Carlile . shoemaker Booth . upper class Carlyle . mason Borrow maltster soldier Carpenter (M.) minister Boscawen upper class Carpenter (W. B.) . minister Boswell upper class lawyer Carrington brewer Bowen . Church Carstares minister Bowring woollen trade Case Church Boyce . cabinet maker Cattermole upper class Boyle (R.) . upper class Cavendish (H.) upper class Bradford yeoman Cavendish (M. ) upper class Bradlaugh clerk Cavendish (T.) upper class Bradley . upper class Cayley . merchant Bradshaw (H.) banker Cecil . upper class Breton . trade Challoner wine cooper Brewster minister Chalmers merchant Bright . miller Chantrey carpenter farmer Bronte (C.) • Church Chatterton . shoemaker Bronte (E.) . Church Chaucer . vintner Burke . civil service Chesney . army Brown . purser Chichele yeoman draper Browne (R.) . upper class Chichester . • . upper class Browne (T.) . mercer Childers upper class Church Browning (R.) clerk Church . merchant Bruce (H.) . upper class Churchill (C.) Church Bruce (M. ) • weaver Churchill (J.) upper class Buchanan farmer Cibber (C.) . sculptor Buckle . merchant Gibber (S.) . upholsterer Bunyan . whitesmith Clapperton doctor Burke . lawyer Clare . labourer Burnet upper class lawyer Clive (R,; . upper class Burns farmer Clough . cotton mer- Burton (Sir Richard) army chant Butler (J.) • draper Cobbett . peasant Butler (S.) . farmer Cobden . yeoman Byng upper class Cockbum upper class Byron upper class Cockerell architect Coke upper class CADOGAN . lawyer Colby . army Cairns . army Colebrooke banker Calamy . minister Colenso . mineral agent Camden . painter stainer Coleridge (H.) author Campbell (C.) carpenter Coleridge (S.) Church OCCUPATION OR SOCIAL POSITION. 283 Colet . merchant Day collector of Collier . Church customs Collins (W.) . hatter Deane . , upper class Collins (W. W.) . artist DeFoe butcher yeoman Colman . upper class De Morgan army Columba upper class Dempster upper class Congreve army Denham . upper class Conington Church Denman . doctor Constable miller De Quincey merchant Cook . agricultural la- D'Ewes . upper class bourer Dibdin . merchant Cooke (G.) . army Dickens . clerk Cooke (H.) . farmer Digby . upper class Cooper (First Lord Dobell . wine merchant Shaftesbury) upper class Doddridge oilman Cooper (Third Lord Dodgson Church Shaftesbury) upper class Dodwell army Cooper (A.) . Church Dolben . Church Copley (Lord Lynd- Donne . trade hurst) . artist Douglas . upper class Cotes . Church Doyle . artist Cotman . mercer Drake . upper class Cotton (A.) . upper class Drummond (T.) lawyer Cotton (C.) . upper class Drummond (W.) . upper class Cowley . trade Dryden . . upper class Cowper upper class Church Dudley . . upper class Cox blacksmith Du Maurier upper class glass manu- Cozens . artist facturer Crabbe . collector of Dundas upper class lawyer customs Dunning . lawyer Crashaw Church Dunstan . upper class Crichton upper class Dyce . doctor Croker . surveyor of customs EASTLAKE (C.) . admiralty agent Crome . journeyman Eastlake (Lady) . doctor weaver Edgeworth upper' class Cromwell (O.) upper class Edwardes Church Cromwell (T.) blacksmith innkeeper Edwards army Cross carpenter Eliot upper class Cruikshank artist Elyot . lawyer Cudworth Church Emlyn . trade CuUen . lawyer Erskine . Etheridge Etty minister army miller and DALRYMPLE . upper class baker Dalton . weaver Dampier ■ farmer FANSHAWE upper class Danby . farmer Faraday . smith Daniel . music master Farquhar Church Darwin (C.) . doctor Faucit . actor D'Avenant vintner and Fawcett . draper innkeeper Ferguson day labourer Davy yeoman Fergusson clerk Dawson . cheesemonger Ferrar ^ merchant 284 APPENDIX. Ferrier . Fielding Fitzgerald Fitzgibbon Flamsteed Fletcher (A.) Fletcher (J.) Flinders . Flood . Foote Forbes (E.) Forbes (J.) Ford Forster Fox (C. J.) Fox (G.) Foxe (R.) Francis . Franklin Franks . Frere Froude . Fry Fuller . upper . law class army . upper class . lawyer . maltster . upper class . Church I . doctor * . lawyer ^3, . trade j . banker! . upper class . upper class . minister . upper class . weaver . yeoman . Church : . trade gjj . navy . ironmaster 'I Church . banker . Church GAINSBOROUGH woollen manu- facturer sea captain cloth worker army upper class minister Church priest musician market gar- dener sailor estate agent recorder soldier upper class rope-maker merchant minister Church army upper class doctor upper class lawyer Gray money scrivener lawyer Grenville (G. ) . upper class Gait Gardiner Garrick . Gascoigne Gaskell . Gauntlett Geoffrey Gibbons . Gibson . Gifford . Gilbert (J.) Gilbert (W.) Gillray Giraldus Girtin . Gladstone Godwin (W.) Goldsmith Gordon . Gower . Graham (G. ) Graham (J.) Grattan Grenville (W.) Gresham Grew Grey Grote Hale Hallam Halley Hamilton (A. Hamilton (W Hamley . Hampden Hardinge Harrington Hartley Harvey . Havelock Hawke . Hawkwood Haydon . Hazlitt . Hemans . Henderson Herbert (A.) Herbert (E.) Herbert (G.) Herschel Hickes . Hill Hinton . Hoadley Hobbes . Hodgson Hogarth . Hogg Holcroft Holl Hood (S.) Hood (T.) Hook (T.) Hook (W.) Hooke . Horner . Horrocks Hort . Howard . Howell . Hughes . Hunter (J.) Hutcheson Hutton (J.) Button (R.) Huxley . Hyde . Church upper class merchant minister army banker lawyer Church soap-boiler upper class doctor navy upper class Church upper class Church yeoman ship builder lawyer tanner printer minister merchant farmer lawyer upper class upper class man of science farmer schoolmaster minister schoolmaster Church banker yeoman farmer shoemaker engraver Church publisher composer Church Church merchant farmer upper class upholsterer Church author farmer minister merchant minister schoolmaster upper class OCCUPATION OR SOCIAL POSITION. 285 INCHBALD . farmer Law (W.) . grocer Irving . . tanner Lawes (H.) . musician Lawrence (H. ) army JAMESON . artist Lawrence (J.) army Jeffrey lawyer (clerk in court Lawrence (S.) trade of sessions) Lawrence (T.) innkeeper enner . . Church Lawes ( J. ) upper class "errold . . actor Layard . civil service . ervis upper class lawyer Leake . naval gunner ' evons . . nail maker Lee . . . Church ' ohnson . . trade Leech . coffee house ^ bhnston . trade keeper ' ones (I. ) . cloth worker Lefroy . Church ;bnes(W.) . yeoman Leighton (F.) Leighton (R.) doctor ] onson . . minister doctor , 'ordan . . stage under- Leslie (A.) upper class army ling Leslie (C.) . Church Joule . brewer Leslie (J.) upper class Church Jowett . . furrier L' Estrange . upper class Lever . builder KEATS . livery stable- Lewis (G. C.) upper class man Lewis (J. F.). engraver Keble . . Church Lewis (W. T.) actor Keene . . law Lidd6n . navy Kemble (F.) . actor Lightfoot accountant Kemble (J. M ) . actor LiUo . jeweller Kemble (J. P. 1 . actor Lingard . .carpenter Kemp . upper class Linnell . wood carver Ken . lawyer Linton (E.) • Church Kennett . . Church Lister . wine merchant Kenyon . . farmer Livingstone . small tea dealer Killigrew . upper class Lloyd . Church King (T.) . trade Locke . lawyer King (W.) . miller Lockhart minister Kingsley (C.) . Church Lodge . grocer Kingsley(M.) . doctor Lovelace upper class Kirkcaldy . upper class Lover . stockbroker ICnight . . Church Lowe Church Knowles . . author Lowth . Church Knox . peasant Lucas . upper class Ludlow . upper class LANCASTEI I soldier shopkeeper Lyell . botanist Lander . . innkeeper Lytton (B,) . army Landor . . doctor Lytton (Earl) . upper class Landseer . artist Lane . Church MACAULAY author Lardner . . minister Macfarren theatrical Latimer . . yeoman manager Laud . clothier Mackenzie doctor Law (J.) . goldsmith Mackintosh army Law (E., Baron Maclaurin minister EUenboroug h) . Church Maclise soldier shoemaker Law (E., Ea rl of Macnaghten . lawyer EUenboroug h) . upper class Macre^y actor-manager 286 APPENDIX. Maginn . . schoolmaster Myers . . Church Maine . doctor Malthus . . author NAIRNE . upper class Manning . merchant Napier (C.) . . upper class Marlowe . shoemaker Napier (C. J.) upper class army Marsh . . Church Napier (J.) . . upper class Marshall . poor glover Napier (Sir J.) . merchant Marston . . lawyer Napier (R.) . . army Marten . . lawyer Napier (W J. P.) upper class army Martineau (H. ) . manufacturer Nash . . Church Martineau (J. 1 . manufacturer Nasmyth (J.) ■ . artist Marvell . . Church Nasmyth (P.) . . artist Mathews (C.) bookseller minister Naylor . . yeoman Mathews (C. J .) . actor Neale (E.) . . Church Maurice . . minister Neale (J.) . Church Mead . . minister NeiU . . army Mprivale . lawyer Neilson (J.) . . millwright Middleton (C. ) . Church Nelson . . Church Mill (J.) . shoemaker Newman (F. W.) . banker Mill (J. S.) . author Newman (J. H.) . banker Miller . . captain of Newton . . yeoman farmer sloop Nicholson . doctor Milman . . doctor Northcote . watchmaker Milner (I.) . . business Norton . . business Milner (J.) . tailor Nott . . yeoman farmer Milton . scrivener yeoman (?) Mitford . . upper class OGLETHORPE . army MoflFat . . custom house Oldcastle . upper class Monck . . upper class Oldfield •. . army Monson . . upper class Oldys . . lawyer Montagu (E.) . upper class Oliphant (L.) . . lawyer Montagu (R.). . Church Oliphant (M.) . business Moore (J.; doctor author O'Neill . . upper class Moore (T.) . provision Opie (A.) . doctor dealer Opie(J.) . carpenter More (T.) . lawyer Ordericus . priest(married} Morgan (G. O. ) . Church Otway . . Church Morgan (H.) . upper class Oughtred . Church Morgan (S.) . actor Outram . . civil engineer Morland (G.) . artist Owen (J.) . Church Morland(S,) . Church Owen (SirR.) . merchant Morris . . bill broker Owen (R.) . . saddler Morley . . upper class Morton . . mercer PAGETQ.) brewer shipowner Mulready . leather Paine . farmer breeches Paley . . Church maker Palmer (E. H.) . schoolmaster Mun . merchant Palmer (J.) . . soldier Munday . . draper Palmer (R.) . . Church Munden . . poulterer Palmer (S.) . . bookseller Munro . . merchant Park . . farmer Murchison . doctor Parker (M.) . . calenderer of Murdock . millwright stuffs Murray . . publisher Parker (T.) . . lawyer OCCUPATION OR SOCIAL POSITION. 287 Parkes (H.) . farmer Reid (T.) . minister Parkes (H. S.] . ironmaster Reid (W.) . . minister Pamell . . upper class Reynolds . Church Parr doctor Richardson . . carpenter Parsons (R.) yeoman blacksmith Ritson . . yeoman Parsons (W.) . carpenter Robertson . minister Pater . . doctor Robinson . navy Patmore . . author Rogers . . merchant Patrick . . deacon (mar- Romney . builder and ried) cabinet maker Pattison . . Church Roscoe market gardener tavern Pearson (J.) . Church keeper Pearson Q. L ) . artist Rose . Church Peel . manufacturer Ross(H. D.). . army Peele . . business Ross(R.) . army Pellew . . sea captain Rossetti (C.) . . opera libret- Penn(SirW.) merchant sea captain tist, etc. Penn (W.) . navy Rossetti (D. G.) . opera libret- Pepys . . tailor tist, etc Perry . . builder Rowe . lawyer Petty . . clothier Rowlandson . . merchant Phelps . . outfitter Ruskin . . wine merchant Phillip . . soldier Pitman . . factory over- SADLER . . upper class seer St. John . . upper class Pitt (W., Ea rl of St. Leger . upper class Chatham) • upper class Sale . army Pitt (W.) . • . upper class Bancroft . . yeoman PoUock . . saddler Scott (D.) . engraver Pope merchant Scott (G. G,) . . Church Person . . vceaver Scott (J.) . . coal factor Pott . lawyer (scrive- Scott (Walter) . lawyer ner) Scott (William) . coal factor Powell . . ale keeper Sedgwick . Church Pratt . lawyer Seeley . . publisher Preston . . farmer Selden . . yeoman Prestwich . wine merchant Shakespeare yeoman trade Price . minister Sharp . Salter Priestley . cloth dresser Shell . . upper class Prior . joiner Sheldon . . menial servant Pugin . architect Shelley . . upper class Pulteney . upper class Sheridan . actor Purcell . . music copyist Siddons . . actor Pusey . upper clis Sidgwick . Church Sidney . . upper class QUARLES . upper class Simpson . . baker Quin . lawyer Sinclair . . upper class Smart . . nobleman's RADCLIFFE . trade steward Raebum . . mill owner Smith (A.) . . lawyer Raffles . . sea captain Smith (H. J. S.) . lawyer Raleigh . . upper class Smith (S.) . . business Randolph . steward Smith (T.) . . upper class Ray . blacksmith Smith (W.) . . farmer 288 APPENDIX. Smith (W. R. . minister Turner . . barber Smith (W. S.) . army Tyndall . . upper class Somers . . lawyer Somerville . navy URQUHART . upper class South . . merchant Ussher . . lawyer Southey . . fanner Southwell ,. upper class VANBURGH . sugar baker Speke . . army Vane . . upper class Spelman . . upper class Varley . . tutor Spenser . . cloth maker Vaughan . upper class Sprat . . Church Vere (F.) . upper class Stanhope . upper class Vere (H.) . upper class Stanley . . Church Vernon . . uppsr class Steele . . lawyer Stephen . . official WALKER . . working jew- Stephenson . fireman eller Sterne . army Wallace . . upper class Stevens . . house painter Waller (E.) . . upper class Stevens . . sea captain Waller (W.) . . upper class Stevenson . engineer Wallis . . Church Stewart . . minister Walpole (H.) . . upper class Stothard . . publican Walpole (R.) . . upper class Street . awyer Walsingham . . lawyer Stubbs . . currier Walter . . coal merchant Sturgeon . shoemaker Walton . . yeoman Suckling . . upper class Warburton . town clerk Sullivan . . musician Ward (M.) . . upper class Sydenham . upper class Ward (S.) . lawyer Symonds . doctor Ward (W. G.) . financier Warham . upper class TAIT . . upper class Warton . . author Tarleton . . merchant Watson (R.) . . Church Taylor (H.) . upper class Watt . carpenter Taylor (J.) . barber surgeon Webster . . actor and musi- Taylor (W.) . manufacturer cal composer Telford . . shepherd Wedgwood . potter Temple . . upper class Wentworth . doctor Tennyson . Church Wesley (C.) . . Church Thirlwall . Church Wesley (J.); • . Church Thompson . upper class Westmacott . . sculptor Thomson . minister Whateley . Church Thurloe . . Church Wheatstone . music seller Thurlow . . Church Whewell . carpenter Tillotson . cloth worker Whiston . Church Toland . . priest Whitbread . brewer Tone . coach maker White (G.) . . lawyer Tooke . . poulterer White (J. B.) . . merchant Trelavimey . army Whitefield . . innkeeper Trevitheck . mine manager Whitelocke . . lawyer of humble Whitgift . merchant origin Whitworth . minister Trollope (A.) . . lawyer Wilberforce (W.) . upper class Trollope(H.). . Church Wilde . . doctor Tunstall . . upper class Wilfrid . . upper class OCCUPATION OR SOCIAL POSITION. 289 Wilkes . malt distiller Woodward tallow chandler Wilkie . minister Woolner post office offi- Wilkins . goldsmith cial WiUett . lawyer Wordsworth (Chas.) Church Williams (C. H.) manufacturer Wordsworth Chris- Williams (Sir R.) upper class topher) Church Williams (R.). tailor Wordsworth (W.) . lawyer Williams (W.). Church Wotton(H.) . upper class Williamson (J.) Church Wotton (N.) upper class Williamson (W.) gardener Wren . Church Wilson (J.) . manufacturer Wright (J.) lawyer Wilson (R.) . Church Wright (T.) printer Wilson (R. T.) . artist Wulfstan upper class Windham army Wyatt . upper class Winthrop . lawyer Wycherley lawyer Wiseman . merchant WofEngton . bricklayer Wolcot . . doctor YATES. ship's stewar Wolfe . . army Yorke . lawyer Wollaston . Church Young (A.) . Church Wolsey . grazier Young (E.) Church 19 290 APPENDIX D. 5 ft. in " W. Blake "Burns T. Moore S. Coleridge S ft. I in ■ nToleridge 5 ft- 9 in. • • - < Keats Dickens Gordon Paine Priestley 5 ft. 2 in Hunter _W. Wordsworth i De Quincey 'Burke S ft. 3 in ■ G. White O. Cromwell S. Wilberforce Hogg 5 ft. 4 in Nelson Huxley S ft. S in Linnell Richardson Cockbum Sft- 10 in...-.- Kenyon Marryatt C. Mathews Mulready R. Fergusson Prestwich S ft. 6 in -i Jeffrey* Ruskin B. Lytton Stevenson J. Wesley Street Bright A. TroUope Madox Brown Wakley S ft. 7 in < Maurice 'Sir R. Burton C. J. Napier Carleton Otway Carlyle ^Byron Froude T. Lawrence r ff . , ;« j Macaulay S ft- " m i Listen O'Connell 5 ft. Sin ' J. S. Mill Porson Rossetti Sedgwick Swift t Southey Tooke ^J. Wilson * According to one description Jeffrey was " scarcely five feet." T It is worth noting that Swift was considered tall by his contemporaries. STATURE. 291 'R. Boyle 6 ft. 2 in Trevitheck Clapperton C. Darwin Borrow , ,, , . J Fawcett ^*'- 3'" ^Irving* Millais 6 ft. in • W. J. Napier Park ( Thackeray W. Scott Selden .Tait f J. Bruce 6 ft. 4 in i Duncan C Graham 'Cobbett; J. Cook Fielding Gait 6 ft. I in i Hobbes Leech • The estimates of Irving'B height vary Petty between 6 ft, 2 in. and 6 ft. 4 in. Reade (^Tennyson 19'' 292 APPENDIX E. PIGMENTATION. The individuals whose pigmentation I have been able to ascertain are here arranged alphabetically in their groups : Fair, Medium, Dark. To facili- tate reference no note is here taken of the three sub-divisions of the medium group. I.— FAIR. Addison, Amherst, Arkwright, Beaton, Berkeley, Blackmore, Bright, Brown, Buchanan, C. Campbell, J. Campbell, S. Canning, Cantelupe Clifford, Congreve, Copley (Lord Lyndhurst), Cowper, CuUen, Dee, Denham, Etty, Fergusson, Fitzgerald, A. Fletcher, J. Fletcher, Freeman, Frobisher, Gordon, Gray, Hardinge, Hogarth, Hogg, Hort, Hutcheson, A. Leslie, B. Lytton, Earl Lytton, Munden, Newton, H. S. Parkes, Peel, Pellew, Sir W. Penn, Pusey, Randolph, Richardson, Ruskin, Sabine, Shelley, A. Smith, Smollett, Street, Thackeray, Tooke, Trevitheck, Turner, Tyndall, Vane, Wakley, Walker, W. Waller, Wallis, Westmacott, Whitefield, Whitgift, J. Wilson, Wolfe. II.— MEDIUM. Anson, M. Arnold, Austen, Austin, F. Bacon, N. Bacon, Baillie, Bancroft, J. Banks, Barnes, I. Barrow, J. Barrow, E. Barry, J. Barry, Becher, C. Bronte, Bennett, J. Bentham, Bentley, Bewick, Blackstone, W. Blake, Bonington, Boscawen, Boswell, Bowring, R. Boyle, Bradley, H. Bradshaw, Brewster, Brougham, E. Browning, R. Browning, Burbage, Burke, Burns, S. Butler, Byng, Byron, Cadogan, T. Campbell, Canton, Carlyle, M. Car- penter, Cayley, Cecil, Chalmers, Chantrey, Chatterton, Chaucer, Chilling- worth, C. Churchill, C. Cibber, Clark, R. Clive, Cobbett, Cockburn, Coke, S. Coleridge, William Collins, Colman, Cooper (First Lord Shaftesbury), R. Cotton, A. Cowley, Crabbe, Cranmer, Crichton, Croker, O. Cromwell, Cross, Cruikshank, C. Darwin, E. Darwin, Davy, Defoe, Denman, De Quincey, PIGMENTATION. 293 Dickens, Dobson, Dryden, Flaxman, Flowers, C. J. Fox, Francis, Fry, Gains- borough, GifFord, Girtin, Gladstone, Goldsmith, G. Graham, Grattan, Grote, Harrington, Harvey, Hastings, Haydon, Hazlitt, Hill, Hoadley, Hobbes, Holcroft, T. Hood, Hooke, Horner, J. Hunter, Huxley, Hyde, Inchbald, Jenner, Jerrold, Jervis, Johnson, I. Jones, Jonson, Jowett, Keats, F. Kemble, Kenyon, Knox, Lambert, Lander, Landon, Landor, Landseer, E. Law (Baron EUenborough), J. Law, W. Law, Latimer, H. Lawrence, J. Law- rence, S. Lawrence, Leech, J. Leslie, Lever, G. H. Lewes, Livingstone, Locke, Macaulay, Mackenzie, Mackintosh, Maclise, Macready, Maginn, Malone, Manning, Marryatt, H. Martineau, J. Martineau, Mead, C. Mid- dleton, J. S. Mill, Millais, Miller, Milton, Mitford, C. Montagu, T. More, G. Morland, Morris, Murchison^ C. Napier, C. J. Napier, Nelson, J. H. Newman, O'Connell, Oldfield, A. Opie, J. Opie, Sir R. Owen, R. Owen, W. Paget, Paine, Park, Patmore, Pepys, Petty, Perkins, Pitt (Lord Chatham), Pitt, Pococke, Pope, Popham, Pratt, Priestley, Prior, Pulteney, Raffles, Reynolds, Rogers, Roscoe, Rose, C. Rossetti, D. G. Rossetti, Bancroft, J. Scott, Walter Scott, William Scott, Selden, Shakespeare, Sidgwick, Sidney, Sinclair, Smart, W. S. Smith, Somers, Somerville, Spelman, Spenser, Stanley, Stephenson, Stewart, Stothard, Suckling, Swift, Sydenham, Tait, H. Taylor, Thomson, Thurloe, H. Vere, E. Waller, R. Walpole, Warburton, Warham, Watt, J. Wesley, Whiston, G. White, S. Wilberforce, W. Wilberforce, Wilde, Wilkie, C. H. Williams, W. Williamson, Wolcot, W. Wordsworth, Wren, Wyatt, Wycherley. HI.— DARK. Abercromby, Babbage, Bagehot, Baxter, Betterton, Bishop, Black, Borrow, Bracegirdle, J. Bruce, Burnet, Burton (Sir R.), Camden, J. Churchill, S. Cibber, Cobden, H. ^Coleridge, J. Cook, Crome, T. Cromwell, Curran, Dampier, Day, Dempster, Dibdin, Digby, Dolben, W. Drumraond, Faraday, Ferrier, Fieling, J. Foxe, Froude, Gait, Garrick, Gay, ;Gibson, M. Godwin, Grenville (Baron), Gresham, Hale, Henderson, E. Herbert, T. Hook, Hooker, Howard, Hunt, Ireton, Irving, Jeffrey, Jewel, Juxon, Kean, Keble, Keene, J. M. Kemble, J. P. Kemble, Ken, Lamb, Lancaster, Laud, T. Lawrence, A. Leslie, Lovelace, Marvell, Melville, J. Milner, J. Moore, T. Moore, H. More, L. A. Neilson, Nicholson, Northcote, M. Oliphant, Otway, Oughtred, Outram, J. Owen, Paley, Parr, R. Parsons, Phillip, Picton, Prestwich, Quarles, Raleigh, Raebum, Ray, Reade, R. Reid, Ridley, Romney, Sedgwick, Sheridan, Siddons, S. Smith, Southey, Steele, Steevens, Stevenson, Symonds, J. Taylor, Temple, Tennyson, Thurlow, Tillotson, Ussher, H. Walpole, Whitelocke, J. Williamson, Windham, Winwood, Wishart, Woffington, Wolsey, J. Wright, Yates. INDEX. The names of authorities are italicised. ABERDEEN, GENIUS OF, 6i ; university, 145. Actors, regional distribution of great, 74 ; parentage of, 87 ; pigmentation of, 214. Ahlfeld, 129. Akenside, 9. Angina pectoris and genius, 187. Anglo-Danish district, genius of, 49, 68. Ansell, 107, 112, 113, 125, 128, 131, 156, 160. Apoplexy and genius, 1 79. Arblay, F. d', 141, 159. Arbuthnot, 9. Area, distribution of. genius on basis of, 33 et seq. Aretceus, 183, 186. Aristotle, 220, 230. Army and parent^e of genius, 84. Arriat, 86. Art isans and partage of geniu s, 83. Artists, regional distribution of, 73 ; heredity of, 84 et seq., 97 ; pig- mentation of, 213. Asthma and Genius, 187. Awkwardness a genius, muscular, 201. BACON, F., SI, 70. Balde, 182. Ball, B., no, 169. Bankers among parentage of genius, 81. Banks, Sir J., 142. Barrow, J., 142. Beauty and genius, 217. Beckett, 26. Beddoe, 35, 46. 47. 49. S^, 86, 209, 210, 211, 214. Bentham, J., 135. Biographical methods, 16 et seq. Birthplace as a criterion of origin, 21. Births, causes of excess of male, 113. Blake, 190. Bonn University, 146. Boys in genius-producing families, predominance of, 112. Bradshaw, J. Bronte, C., ijg. Brown, T., 9. Browne, Sir T., 54, 219. Browning, E. B., 159. Bruce, J., 135. Brynmor-Jones, 47, 59. Brythons, 48, 58. Buchanan, 150. 296 INDEX. Burns, 2x8. Byron, 140. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY AND GENIUS, 69, 144 et seq. Campbell, H., 44, 120. Cantlie, 44. Carman, Miss, 119. Carpenters and parentage of genius, 82. Cassel, III, 199. Cattell,/. M., 8, 11, 15, 124. Caxton, 150. Celibacy and genius, 152 et seq. Chalmers, 142. Chamberlain, A. F., 137. Chatterton, 141, 174, 218. Cheerfulness and genius, 220. Christopher, 207. ChronologicaU distribution of British genius, 11. Clergy and the parentage of genius, 79. 89- Clouston, 198. Clumsiness and genius, 201. Collins, 128. Collins, F. H., 1 06, 1 64. Commercial avocations and parentage of genius, %\ et seq., 89. Constable, 135. Consumptive men of genius, 179. Cooky, C. JB., 91. Cotton, Sir A. T., 174. County basis, distribution of genius on, 29 et seq. Cowley, 153. Cowper, 195. Craftsmen and parentage of genius, 82, 85, 89. Criminality in relation to genius, 1 10, 118, 126, 128, 132. Cromwell, T., 142 Cullen, 183. DALTON, 153. Darwin, C, 55, 69, 96, 151. Dexter, E., 146, Dickens, 135. Dictionary of National Biography, I, 4, S. 6, 7. 14. 16, 18. Disparity of parents' age at eminent child's birth, 130, 132. Divines, regional distribution of, 65 ; ill health of, 178 ; pigmentation of, 214. Doctors and parentage of genius, 84. Douai College, 145. Down, Langdon, 80, no, 118, 131. Doyle, Sir Conan, 24, 39, 41. Dramatic ability, regional distribu- tion of, 74. Dryden, 219. Dublin, genius of, 64. Duckworth, Sir Dyce, 185. Dugdale, n8. Duncan, Matthews, 129, 134. Dutch elements in British genius, 27, 43- EAST ANGLIA, GENIUS OF, 40, 42, 49. 50, SI. 70. 213. Edinburgh, genius of, 61 ; Uni- versity, 145. Education of men of genius, 143 et seq. Eichhoh, 199. Eighteenth century, genius of, 11, 12, 14, 3S- Eldest-born children, genius and, 116 et seq. , 208. Eliot, George, 159. Engelmann, /. G., 165. Environment on genius, influence of, 75. Epilepsy and genius, 196. Explorers, pigmentation of , 214. INDEX. 297 Eye-colour, 209 et sec/. Eyes of men of genius, 217. FATHERS OF EMINENT MEN, ABILITY OF, 99 et seq. ; age of at eminent child's birthj 120 et seq. Firi, 201. Fertility of men of genius, 163 et seq. First-bom children, n6 et seq., 208. Flemish elements in British genius, 27. 43- Fletcher, Joseph, 34, 75. Foreign countries, residence of men of genius in, 149 et seq. Foreign elements in British men of genius, 26. France, residence of British men of genius in, 144, 150. French elements in British men of genius, 26 et seq., 43, 64. GALTON, F, 67, 68, 91, 94, loi, 108, 109, 118, 124, 127, 166, 169, 175, 206, 225, 226. Garrod, 184. Geissler, 113. Genius, sense in which the word is used, 19. German elements in British genius, 27. Giantism, 207. Gibbon, 147. Gilbert, J. A., 207. Gilbert, W., 10, 70. Gildas, 56. Glasgow University, 145. Gottingen University, 146. Goidels, 48, 58. Goldsmith, O., 141. Goodhart, 201. Gout and genius, 180 et seq. Gr asset, 231. Gregory, Lady, 65. Guppy, H. B., 47. HAIR-COLOUR, 209 et seq. Hales, S., 71,222. Hall, Marshall, 198. Hall, R., 9. Hamilton, Lady Emma, 6. Hamilton, SirW. R., 196. Handwriting and genius, illegible, 200. Hartwell, E. M., 198. Harvey, 55, 71. Health of men of genius, 134, 177. Heidelberg University, 146. Herbert of Cherbury, Lord, 196. Hobbes, 53, 135. ffolway, R. S., 128. Hooker, 219. Huguenots, 26, 64. Humanism in England, 1 3. Hume, 138. Humphry, Sir J., 119. Hutchinson, Woods, 184. IDIOCY IN RELATION TO GENIUS, 80, no, u8, 126, 131, 134. 203. 228. Imprisonment of men of genius, 223. Infancy of men of genius, 133 et seq. Infantilism, 208. Insanity in relation to genius, no, 128, 187, 188 etseq., 227, 229. Ipswich, genius of, 41. Ireland, W. W., 203. Irish genius, 23 et seq., 28, 63 «; seq., 75- Italian elements in British genius,27. JASTROW, J., 137. Jeffreys, 9. Jewellers among parentage of artists, 86. 298 INDEX. Jews, 26. Jutes, 56. KENT, GENIUS OF, 34, 4°, 43. 55- JCdrosi, 131. Kraepelin, 201. LANDOR, 54. Lawyers and parentage of genius, 84. Lay cock, 185. Leicestershire, genius of, 49. Leinster, genius of, 49. Leslie, C, 120, 130. Leyden University, 145. Lincolnshire, genius of, 49, 73. Lombroso, 125, 226. London, genius of, 22, 35, 41, 43, 44. Longevity of genius, I'ji et seg. Louvain University, 146. Lyell, 151. MACAULAY, 54, 202. Macdonald, A., iig, 208. Mackintosh, 56. Maclean, A. H. H., 24, 41, 91, 146. Magri, no. Marandon de Montyd, 110,169. Marlborough, 52. Marro, 125, 128, 132, 186, 221. Maudsley, 190, 192. Melancholy and genius, 220 et seq. Middlesex, genius of, 43. Midlothian, genius of, 61. Mill, J. S., 143. Mitchell, Sir A., 118. Miibius, 97. Montague, 10. Moll, iiS. More, Hannah, lo. Moreau (de Tours), 231. Morris, W., 230. Mothers, debt of men of genius to their, 103. Mothers' age at eminent children's birth, 126 et seq. Miilkr, Max, 97. Munden, 214. Murchison, 143. Musical composers, 5 ; precocity of, 142. Myopia and genius, 201. NACKE, 118. Napoleon III., 10. National Portrait Gallery, 215. New England and East Anglia, 50. Neurasthenia and genius, 197. Newfon, Sir I., 49, 69, 142. Nigrescence, index of, 211. Nineteenth Century, British genius in the, 12, 14, 33, 88, 92, 122, 150, 161, 165. Norfolk, genius of, 39, 40. Normans, 26. Northamptonshire, genius of, 49. Nottinghamshire, genius of, 49, 73. DATES, TITUS, 5. Odin, 91. Ordovices, 58. Oxford University and genius, 144 et seq. PADUA UNIVERSITY, 145. Papillault, 207. Pearson, K., 106, 108, 164, 168. Peers, hereditary, 3. Perlcins, 143. Permewan, 200. Pigmentation, index of, 211 et seq. Pitt-Rivers, 45. Poll-tax returns, 33. Poets, regional distribution of, 66 ; heredity of, 97. Population, distribution of genius on basis of, 33 et seq. INDEX. 299 Porter, 207. Posthumous children, 136. Powell, E., 33. Precocity of genius, 136 et seg. Priestley, 202. Professional class element among men of genius, 90. Purcell, S4- RALEIGH, 51. Rauber, A., 115. Ray, 151. Reformation in England, 13. Renaissance in England, 13, 34. Rigis, 110, 169. ReveilU-Parise, 220, 222. Reynolds, Sir J., 52, 153- Rheumatism and genius, 187. Rhys, J., 47, S9- Ripley, 21, 46. Robert on, 129. Royalty, 3. Rutland, genius of, 40, 69. SAILORS, REGIONAL DISTRI- BUTION OF GREAT, 72, 213. St. Andrew's University, 145. St. Patrick, 150. Saxon counties, genius of, 43, 56. Scientific men, regional distribution of, 67 et seg. ; heredity of, loi ; pigmentation of, 213. Scotch genius, 23 e^ seg., ^^etseg., 66, 72. Scott, SirW., 138. Seventeenth century, British genius in, IS, 28. Shakespeare, 54. Shelley, 202. Short sight and genius, 201. Shuttleworth, 118. Shyness and genius, 218. Sidgwick, Mrs. H., 108, 109. Sidney, Sir P., 154. Siddons, 55. Simpson, Sir J. K, 164. Simpson, Sir W. G., 134. Smart, C, 195. Soldiers, regional distribution of great, 71. Somerset, genius of, 52. Somerville, Mrs., 10. Sorbonne, 144. South-western focus of genius, 44, SI, 71- Spasmodic muscular movements, 200. Speech defects and genius, 197 et seg. Spencer, H., 146. Stammering and genius, 197 et seg. Starbuck, 1 1 9, 128. Sterility of men of genius, 163 et seg. Stone, prevalence of, 187. Stowell, Lord, 136. Suffolk, genius of, 39, 40, 41, 50. Sully,/., 137, 148. Sutherland, genius of, 62. Sydenham, 182. TAYLOR,!., 49- Temperament of genius, 226. Thomdike, E. L., 162. Thurlow, 142. Timidity and genius, 218. Toulouse, no, 169. Trade and the parentage of genius, 81 et seg., 89. Trinity College, Dublin, and genius, 144. ULSTER, GENIUS OF, 64. University education of men of genius, 143 et seg. Unskilled workers and parentage of genius, 83. 300 INDEX. Upper class group of men of genius, 78, 90. Utrecht University, 145. VARIGNY, H. DE, 206. Voice in men of genius, high-pitched, 206. WALL, A. J., lis. Walloon element in British genius, 27. 43- Walpole, 50. Watson, 183. Wells, G. S., 119. Wells, Sir Spencer, 183, 185. Welsh Border, genius of, 46, 54, 70. Welsh genius, 23 et seq., 28, 47, 57 et seq. West Indian families and genius, 15 1. Williams, H., 56. Winter, L., 118. Wiseman, 140. Wives of men of genius, insanity among, 193. Women of genius, British, 10, 28, 38, 74) 108. 153. i-SI etseq., 163, 176. Writer's cramp and genius, 201. Wyllie, 198. YEO, BURNEY, 185. Yeomen and parentage of genius, 78. Yoder, A. H., 109, 114, 117, 124, 128, 134. Young, T., 54. Youngest born children, genius in, wd et seq. NEW WORK BY JOHN ASHTON. In I vol., demy 8vo. containing numerous Illustrations from old Cartoons, Broadsheets, &c. Price 7s. 6d. net. Gossip in the First Decade of Victoria's Reign. By John Ashton, Author of " Social Life in the Reign of Queen Anne," &c. NEW WORK BY MICHAEL OAVIH. Based upon Personal Investigations in Russia. In I vol., crown 8vo, cloth. Price 5s. Within the Pale : The True Story of Anti-Semitic Persecations in Russia. By Michael Davitt, Author of " Leaves from a Prison Diary," "Life and Progress in Australasia." The Hearts of Men. ByH. Fielding, Author of "The Soul of a People," &c. In I vol., demy 8vo. Price los. 6d. net. Second Edition. The Man in the Iron Mask. By TiGHE Hopkins, Author of "An Idler in Old France," "The Dungeons of Old Paris," &c. A true history of the Man in the Iron Mask as opposed to the Popular Legend. In i vol., large crown 8vo, with numerous Portraits and Plans of Prisons. Special binding. Price 7s. 6d. net. An Idler in Old France. By TiGHE Hopkins, Author of "The Dungeons of Old Paris," "Nell Haffenden," &c. In i vol., crown 8vo, extra cloth. Price 6s. LONDON: HURST AND BLACKETT, LIMITED. Gypsy Folk=Tales. By Francis Hindes Groome, Author of "In Gypsy Tents," " Two Suffolk Friends," &c. In i vol., demy 8vo. Price 12s. Personal Forces of the Period. By T. H. S. EscOTT, Author of " England : Its People, Polity and Pursuits," "Social Transformations of the Victorian Age," &c. In I vol., large crown 8vo, extra cloth. Price 6s. Praeraphaelite Diaries and Letters. Containing Letters of Dante Gabriel Rossetti ; Diary of Ford Madox Brown; the P.R.P. Journal, by W. Rossetti. Edited by William Michael Rossetti. In i vol., crown 8to. Illustrated. Price 6a. The Old Court 5uburb. (Original Edition.) By Leigh Hunt. In i vol., crown Svo, with Frontispiece. Price 55. Family Romance: Or, the Domestic Annals of the Aristocracy. By Sir, Bernard Burke, Ulster King-of-Arms. In i ^vol., crown Svo, with Frontispiece. Price Js. 1 The Romance of the Forum : Or, Narratives, Scenes and Anecdotes from Courts of Justice. By Peter Burke, Serjeant-at-Law. In i vol., crown Svo, with Frontispiece. Price 5s. LONDON: HURST AND BLACKETT, LIMITED. Dr. SYEN HEDIN'S GREHT WORK ^ Central Asia and Tibet: TOWARDS THE HOLY CITY OF LASSA. In 2 vols. 1,200 pages, 420 Illustrations from Drawings and Photographs, Portrait of the Author, 8 full-page Coloured Illustrations from Paintings, and 5 Maps. Handsomely Bound in Cloth, Gilt Top. PRICE: TW© GUINEAS NET. An Illustrated Prospecias containing Synopsis of Contents, &c., can be had on Application, LONDON: HURST AND BLACKETT, LIMITED. XHE WONDERFUL CAREEK OF EBENEZER LOBB. Related by Himself. Edited, with an Appreciation, by Allen Upward. One Vol., crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d. FOLLY AND FRESH AIR. By Eden Phillpots, Author of "The Human Boy," " My Laughing Philosopher," &c. Illustrated by J. Leys Pethy- BRIDGE. One Vol., crown 8va Price 3s. 6d. THE SECOND THOUGHTS OF AN IDLE FELLOW. By Jerome K. Jerome, Author of "Three Men in a Boat," &c., &c. One Vol., crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d. THE NEW FICTION, and other Egsayg on Literary Subjects. ByH. D. Traill, Author of "The New Lucian," "The Life of Sir John Franklin," &c. One Vol. , crown 8vo. Price 6s. LADT HAMILTON AND LORD NELSON. By John Cordy Jeaffreson. New and Revised Edition. Containing Additional Facts, Letters, and other Materials. With Portrait of Lady Hamilton. One Vol., large crown 8vo, gilt top. Price 6s. THE REAL LORD BYRON. By John Cordy Jeaffreson. With Portrait of Lord Byron, by T. Phillips, R.A., engraved on steel. One Vol., crown 8vo. Price 5s. FIFTY YEARS OF MY LIFE IN THE WORLD OF SPORT AT HOME AND ABROAD. By Sir John Dugdale Astley, Bart. One Vol., crown 8vo, with Portrait. Price 6s. Also in small crown 8vo, cloth. Price 2s. 6d. FROM VELDT CAMP FIRES. Stories of Southern Africa. By H. A. Bryden, Author of "An Exiled Scot," "Gun and Camera in Southern Africa," &c. One Vol., crown 8vo, Price 3s. 6d. THE KISS OF ISIS. By Capt. Arthur Haggard, Author of "Only a Drummer Boy," "With Rank and File," &c. One Vol., crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d. LONDON AT THE END OF THE CENTURY. By Arthur W. ABeckett, Author of "The Member for Wrottenborough, " " The Modern Adam, " &c. One Vol. crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d. LONDON: HURST AND BLACKETT, LIMITED.