traditions are not spared, nor is their present fivefold preeminence in lists ofsubversives. Weyl's study ofsurnames is carried a novel step further, proving within a nationality wide differences ofrank among its names—especially among theJews whose surnames are ofrecent origin. Levine, Epstein, Stern, Shapiro, and Kaplan outrank by nine to four in descending order such names as Cohen in twenty rosters of eminence. The explanation is to be found in the learned rank of the original bearers. So the English names Clark, Palmer, Draper, and Miner outrank other English names for similar reasons, and the Clarkes are a bit better than the Clarks, while the Puritan names from southern New England far outrank the common English names, as Huntington had shown. A fine book, crammed with novel and well-proved data on all the races and kiths in our country. S. Colum Gilfillan, Ph.D. I2i¡ Ocean Avenue Santa Monica, California 90401 The Living Races ofMan. By Carleton S. Coon, with Edward E. Hunt,Jr. New York: Knopf, 1965. Pp. xxxii+344+xx. $10.00. Carleton Coon is a great anthropologist because he has recognized fundamental problems ofhis subject and has given fresh and reasoned insights into them. These problems are: (1) How did the modem races ofman evolve in the Pleistocene? (2) What adaptive significance is there in the differences among human races? The first ofthese was scarcely even noted before his recent book, The Origin ofRaces fi], and the publication in 1950 of Races by Coon, Garn, and Birdsell [2] was a milestone in the study of the second. The Living Races ofMan is devoted to a description of the major physical differences among the peoples ofthe world and to an analysis of the possible causes ofthese differences . Somewhat over one-half the book concerns the traits, environments, languages, implements, and history (up to the present) ofthe various human groups, all integrated in a geographical framework. Numerous maps and about two hundred photographs of individuals of different groups add clarity. I am a geneticist and paleontologist, not an anthropologist, and can only say that I found this part ofthe book (and the rest) well and interestingly written. The literature on human diversity is cluttered with middens of observations that are seldom made part ofan intelligible picture. A major simplification advocated by Coon is the importance of what he calls "Movius' Line," for its discoverer, stretching west of Sinkiang and south of Tibet to the Bay of Bengal. The Mongoloids and Australoids evolved east of this line for hundreds ofthousands ofyears, according to Coon, and the other races west ofit. He postulates less interchange across the line than among the groups on either side. In particular, he hypothesizes that the Negroes have a relatively large amount ofCaucasoid ancestry and that their origin as a group may be due to this admixture (original or secondary) with the forest pygmies. This and other original hypotheses will undoubtedly stir the air and perhaps a few minds for some time. It is obvious that different human populations differ in the frequencies ofmany traits. 320 Book Reviews Perspectives in Biology and Medicine · Winter 1967 But why do they differ? How important relative to each other are the antipodal forces ofadaptation andhistorical accident? Coon sets himselfsquarely in the camp ofadaptation and (with Hunt involved in this part) presents an impressive amount ofdirect and indirect evidence for an adaptive significance ofa wide variety oftrends. The aspects ofthe environment invoked are mainly epidemic diseases and climate, and the geography of different aspects ofclimate itselfoccupies fifteen pages with maps. Some ofthe characters discussed are relatively recondite, and for some no adaptive significance is suggested. It is peculiar, although not physiologically inexplicable, that both increased heat flow through the lower arms (some Mongoloids) and decreased flow (cold-adapted populations of other races) are regarded by workers in the area as specific adaptations to cold. Coon does not, I think, mention chance as even a real alternative to selection (including pleiotropic adaptation). However, human populations have often been small, and realistic models now indicate that random elements may have been moderately important in human evolution for monogenic or even oligogenic traits. The general importance of these random elements is...
Read full abstract