measurements in order to preserve the characteristics of the group to science and history, for in another generation or two they will be completely mixed up and extinct. They are going rapidly like many of our American tribes and unless promptly studied we shall before many years long in vain for satisfactory records. Here is a problem which calls for immediate attention, a problem of much more than a local or even only Asiatic interest, something indispensable to American anthropology; and one remembers with pity the recent resolutions relating to the problems of the Pacific made at the Congress of Hawaii, among which questions like this were wholly forgotten.

A little farther south, we come to still another interesting and important group, in the process too of becoming anthropologically spoiled by amalgamation--the Mongolians. The term "Mongol" applied to many of the Asiatic peoples is of course a misnomer, much as when we call all white people "Caucasian " or "Aryan." The Mongolian people who extend over a large region to the south of Lake Baikal, and admixture with whom is very evident in some parts of China, are, like the Koriaks and the Tunghuz, remarkable for the frequent occurrences among them of types that resemble, and at times resemble to the point of identity, the American Indian. Besides this, you will find among the Mongolians not a few indications of admixture with white people. You will find, especially in the western part of the territory, individuals with blue eyes and brown hair and white skin. And in southern Mongolia the people have become mixed with other branches of the yellow-browns that do not so much resemble the American Indian. Here surely is a stock that calls for investigation, not merely physically but also linguistically and in other directions. They speak five chief dialects or languages; they sing songs that are purely Indian in sound and character, and they do many things like the Indian. One night, be ing absorbed in my work, and hearing a Mongolian pass, singing as he went, I just simply became confused; it seemed I must be some

where in America amongst the Indian tribes. Whether the words were alike I do not know, but the sounds were identical. They are like the Indians in many habits for instance, you will find piles of rocks in the mountain passes accumulated through ages by the traveling Mongols, precisely as you may see in parts of our Sierras where they have been piled up by the Indians; and they do exactly as the Indian does when he reaches the summit of the pass-they take up a pebble, offer a short prayer, spit on the stone, pass it over their legs, return thanks that they have reached the summit, and pray that they may reach the end of their journey in good strength and safety. This is exactly what the Pueblo Indian does in our southwest, or the Peruvian Indian in the Andes. And this is but one instance out of many such resemblances between the Mongolian and the American Indian. They extend to personal and even religious observances, notwithstanding the fact that the Mongols have long been converted to Lamaism, one of the most exacting and intolerant of religions. So here again there is a series of problems which urgently calls for investigation, and they are problems connecting directly with the American, and hence calling for the student well acquainted with the American Indian.

We come now to the more cultured and better known groups of the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Indo-Chinese, Burmese, Hindu, etc., and every one of these groups teems with problems that need investigation.

Take Japan for instance. To this day the origin of the Japanese people is in considerable haze. It is supposed that their main line of ancestors, in all probability of mixed Tunghuz derivation, came about 1,000 years B.C. or a little over, from somewhere in eastern or northeastern Manchuria, and very likely also southeastern Siberia. But it is also perceptible in Japan, especially among the female children, that there has been some infusion of an Eskimo-like type. In all probability the "Tunghuz" carried with them some elements of the Asiatic Eskimo. You may find little girls in the streets of Tokyo

to-day who have perfect Eskimo features, and you will find this feature occasionally in the adults as well. The Japanese know it, but whether they are not willing to admit it, or simply have not pronounced themselves upon this point, they have never offered any explanation. It seems that the invading stream was derived from a large part of the northeastern region, that after passing around or through Korea they reached the main island of Japan, settled then by the Aino, and that possessing better military art and weapons, they prevailed over the Aino partly by uniting with them and absorbing them, and partly by destruction. The Aino have survived only in the north, and to-day not only are they few in number but it is practically impossible to find a full-blood among them. But this was by no means all of the origin of the Japanese. Before even the Aino came, there apparently was in the southern portion of the islands a neolithic population. The Japanese collections contain now some skeletal remains

of these people, and these show that even then there was already a diversity, though the general type is that of a yellow-brown people, who must have penetrated into southern Japan at that time from Korea or the continent. And there is another element, not traceable so far historically, that apparently came from the south. Whether it came from Formosa, or from the Chinese coast or even from the Philippine Islands is not known, but some facts would point to the Philippines rather than to Formosa. This southern element is responsible for bringing into Japan certain cultural features, and physically a few traces of the Negrito. To this day you will find Japanese-rarely yet occasionally-who bear physical traces of negrito admixture. They are it seems ashamed of it. The Japanese anthropologists are aware of the fact, but it has received no further attention. In addition there was a more important influx of Chinese and Koreans, and also since early in historical times there was a slight influence of whites. Just what part these different elements played in the building up of the Japanese people remains to be determined. Also,

there are still many old mounds and sites in Japan that demand careful exploration. The Japanese anthropologists are slowly working in these directions, but they must necessarily lack the perspective that could be brought to the field by the American student. For this and other reasons it would be better if scientists from this continent as well as from other parts of the world would participate in the work.

The Koreans too, present a field for much further research. Though yellow-browns, they are a distinct people from both the Japanese and Chinese. They resemble greatly some of the more western Russian Tartars. The Japanese in general, for political reasons, are rather anxious to convince the Koreans as well as others, that the Koreans are the same as themselves, but the scientific observer sees readily substantial differences, at least as large as are those between the Koreans and Chinese.

In China itself there are still many problems for anthropological investigation. In the first place is the origin of the great Chinese people, counting to-day between three and four hundred million individuals. We know that their ancestors came from somewhere in the northwest; that they mixed with people already in the country, the so-called wild tribes and others; that later they impinged upon and perhaps mixed slightly with the Negritos of the south. But none of this is as yet fully cleared or established, and there are many other questions. There are in southwestern China groups some of whom are not yellow-brown but rather Indonesian or of Hindu derivation, much nearer to white people than the Chinese. We find also considerable physical and other differences be tween the Chinese of the north and the Chinese of the south. These remain to be investigated. There are large districts where there are remains in the nature of mounds, or burial caves, or sites, which have hardly yet been touched. Also there are unknown tribes in the western mountains. Some of these tribes have been mentioned by explorers, but none have been investigated anthropologically, and what is true of the western part of China is even more true of the neighboring Tibet. The southern portions of Tibet are the least desirable anthropologically because they are the most mixed, and they have been investigated to a certain extent by the English. The real Tibetans live more in the center and towards the northeast of the great region, and among them again one finds the physiognomy of the American Indian.

South of China are masses of mixed population; but there is one prevailing group that needs careful attention, and that is the Malays. These people are found in Borneo, in Java and the rest of the Malay Archipelago, in the Philippines and elsewhere, besides on the continent, and we still lack a knowledge of them which would enable us to say precisely what they represent, and which would enable us to join them more directly to other branches of the yellow-brown people.

Here in the south we find too one of the most enigmatic of all the now existing groups of humanity, namely the Negrito. There are indications that at one time the Negrito occupied a very much larger territory than he occupies to-day, that he was in other words a much more important anthropological group than he seems to be now. There are to this day Nogrito settlements in the little islands off the southeast of Formosa; there are traces of them in southern China, and more in Burma and Indo-China; they people the Andaman and the Nicobar Islands off the coast of India, and there is a large remnant of them in the Philippine Islands, especially on the island of Luzon. But they, or traces of them, exist also in New Guinea, and in many of the islands of Micronesia, Melanesia and even Polynesia. Therefore the opinion is justified that the Negrito at one time, before and during the influx of stronger peoples from the northwest, played an important part in the peopling of Asia. But we still do not know just where to place the Negrito. Is he allied to the African Pygmy? or is he a separate development? That he has some connection with the Negro is certain, but how can this connection be explained? And when and whence has he reached the territories

he peopled? If any human group should be thoroughly known, it is surely the Negrito; but he is receiving nowhere near the attention that he deserves. Here again there is a fertile field for investigation.

As we proceed eastward we now approach the great group of Polynesians. This is the particular group that is just now receiving so much attention; but I am afraid that some of this attention will be misplaced, for it can not lead to any great results. In the first place it is well known that the peopling of Polynesia is quite recent; in the second place nothing has ever been found on all these islands that would justify a belief in anything more ancient. Furthermore, and this is perhaps the most important, any one who has had any direct acquaintance with the Polynesians must readily have recognized that they are a mixed people. There are individuals among them who resemble more or less the American Indian, while others represent more the Malayan type of yellow-browns; there are those who clearly approach the white man; and there are numerous individuals who bear traces of the Negrito or Negro. Now, a mixed population of this nature, and of recent historical derivation, can not yield a great deal to anthropological research. There are undoubtedly problems of interest in the study of the Polynesians, but when we contrast them with those of the rest of the Far East, we can not but perceive that the Polynesian problems have not a primary importance.

A more important set of problems are those relating to Australia. We have heard much about the "Australian race," but it is very doubtful if there is any such thing as an Australian race. If we compare the natives of one part of Australia with the natives of other parts, we see such differences that physical unity can scarcely be contemplated. They have of course been territorially circumscribed and they have intermixed; they have numerous customs in common, though they also differ in this respect; but they are probably not one people. They have commonly been talked of as "the Australian"; they should rather be dealt with as the "Australians." The anthro

pologists have further sinned against the Australians by classing them as but little higher than the anthropoid apes. Because some of them present various primitive features, such as marked supraorbital ridges or pronounced prognathism, they have been placed on the lowest rung of the human scale. This is not yet fully justified. The Australian demands a lot of new careful, unbiased investigation, and he demands it urgently for he also is disappearing-not by amalgamation, although that also exists in some parts-but through habits and diseases introduced by the white man.

From Australia there is but a step to Melanesia, which too, presents its problems; the main one being perhaps the advent into these regions of the African Negro. Most if not all the groups show individuals who are regular types of the African Negro in physiognomy, character of the hair, stature and all other respects. This is a big negro, not the small Negrito who was evidently always small and whose diminished stature with slender limbs has made him conspicuous even in admixtures. The type represented here, aside perhaps of some Negrito, is the real African. But how did Africans come into these far away islands! They never were navigators of any note. Were they brought there by others, perhaps the Egyptians or the Arabs? We do not know as yet. It is another problem of the Pacific. And there are others in Melanesia.

Then there are the many problems of the people of the Indies. As yet we do not know exactly what the Indian populations represent, or just how and when they came. There was a stream of "Aryans," but who were they? And just who anthropologically are the Dravidians, the Ceylon Vedahs and the other groups of importance? We see on one hand a large Mediterranean strain. There are many people in India who, if placed in a more northern climate for a few years, would so closely resemble the southern Italian that they could not be told apart. There are other Hindu who resemble the people of Afghanistan, or those of Persia, southeastern Russia, and perhaps even the Nordics of Europe. Again there are undoubted and numerous semitic elements, and

then of course there are the mixtures of the Malays and other yellow-browns, and those of the Negrito. Here are many problems that await and deserve a careful further anthropological investigation.

So much in a very superficial way about the more particular problems of the Far East and the Pacific. There are plenty of them and they claim our special attention because as Americans we are directly interested in the eastern Asia which gave us our Indian. But these parts of the world present some greater, more comprehensive problems of the most stimulating and absorbing interest, which can not be solved fully before many of the particular questions shall have been answered, but which must be kept before our mind.

The first of these more comprehensive problems is that of the origin, derivation and time of coming of the yellow-brown stem of humanity. Here is a multitude of people, enough to fill three times over and more the whole American continent as it is now populated, who, though they extend from the farthest north down to the equator, present neverthe less many characteristics in common. They are not of the same color, but are all yellowish-brown, ranging from yellowish-white down to brown-black. They have all the so-called Mongolic eye, especially in the child; they are all characterized by a scarcity of beard, by black or brownish-black and wherever unmixed, straight hair, which shows also certain microscopic features that differentiate it from the hair of the rest of the human family; and there are still other characteristics that unite these people. They must all have proceeded from the same stem. But where did they originate? How, why and when did they people Asia? How did they become so subdivided and acquire their secondary differences? Notwithstanding the fact that they show so many characteristics apart from the white man, yet they show much more resemblance to him than to the blacks. There is no line of demarcation between the whites and the yellow-browns, as there is between the browns and the blacks. What is the meaning of all these facts? Here

But the greatest and most comprehensive of all the problems of the Far East and the southern archipelagos, is that of man's antiquity in these regions. We know that since the Tertiary these regions were and still are inhabited by anthropoid apes. We therefore have had there forms near to man since at least the Pliocene period. In the island of Java have been discovered the remains of a creature that is the closest to man of all non-human forms thus far known. Whether this being was directly ancestral to man or not does not matter; the point is that many things indicate this region as the possible site of man's earliest differentiation, of man's origin. But the truth in the case remains to be determined. Explorations in this field have thus far barely touched the surface. There are vast promising deposits, and almost endless numbers of caves that demand exploration. Of all the fields of anthropological research here is the most pregnant. And it lies fallow.

Connected with the preceding is the problem as to why early man has not populated the mainland of eastern Asia. In all this part of Asia, extending to the Turkestans, there has not been found thus far a single object which would unquestionably point to man's geologic antiquity. The objects thus far discovered over these vast regions are those of the Neolithic period, and apparently not even the oldest parts of the Neolithic. The man who occupies these territories is not allied with anything primitive; he is not very substantially different from the white man; he is more related to the white man than to the blacks; his origins point westward, not southward. The only conclusion that one can reach is that the region which is now known as China and the continent to the north of this, had never been peopled by early man, for which there must have been weighty reasons. On closer analysis it is possible to reduce these reasons to two only-either early man never was in southern Asia; or he was there in the south but was prevented from reaching farther north by insurmountable, for him, natural

poid apes has thus far been found in central or northeastern Asia would somewhat favor the second hypothesis. The barrier to the extension of these apes northward may have been the same that prevented a similar extension of early man or the human precursors. Though it is also possible that early man developed in the south but much farther westward, maybe even as far as the African continent. All this is to be determined. Yet certain facts indicate that, whether early man did or did not once exist in southern Asia, there did exist towards the north a barrier that might have prevented his spread in that direction. A large portion of China is covered by a peculiar Quaternary geologic formation, the so-called loess. The loess is generally poor in fossils, and geologists in China have inclined to the opinion that during the deposition of these accumulations the great region thereby covered was probably not as habitable as it is to-day; that it did not offer sufficient resources for man or many animals; that the loess formation may represent conditions such as exist in the Turkestans or southern Mongolia at this day. It appears to represent a region where the alluvia left after overflows of the rivers after they dried were disseminated by the winds and came to form the earth's surface under semi-desert conditions. But the actual facts are still to be established. This only shows how great is the need of actual investigation, geological, paleontological and from many other points of view, in these regions.

Such are at least some of the more particular, as well as the more comprehensive problems of the more eastern parts of the Asiatic continent, presented in a simple and meager manner. My object is merely to show how necessary it is for American anthropology to pay more attention to the Far East. The time has come when we must cease to be provincial. I would like to see our institutions establish proper research stations in eastern Asia where local workers could be trained for investigation in anthropology and related branches. And I would like to see the American men of science as well as others, help to establish for