Highly gifted though man may be, he cannot at once reach all the limits of the field which is open to his activity. For this reason, in time as well as in space, we find by the side of inferior peoples and _races_, other peoples and _races_ which are superior, equal among themselves, but different. Such is the real information gained by a comparison of the present and past condition of mankind. II. M. Perrier is a polygenist and an autochthonist; he makes use of the expression _pure race_ as equivalent to the term _species_. Being a physician, and a learned one, he touches upon anatomical and physiological questions, and upon the limited fertility and sterility of half-breeds, and reproduces some of the opinions which I have already attacked. He pays particular attention to present populations, and endeavours to prove the superiority of those which he regards as pure. He quotes the Arabs in particular, and praises their ancient and modern civilizations. But on this point I make the same objection to him which I made to M. de Gobineau. We know very little of the Himyarites and the Adites. Caussin de Perceval shows them to have played at different times the part of conquerors; but they were conquerors who were barbarians, and whose manners were thoroughly savage. When they left their deserts under the impulse of Islamism, did they appear with the marks of civilized peoples? Certainly not. It was only after their conquests, and in consequence of the crossings which they underwent, that we find the great Arabian civilizations rise in Africa, Asia, and in Spain. Was the civilization, which was developed upon the spot, and which has been brought to light by Palgrave, equal to that of the Almohades, the Almoravides, or the Abassides? Evidently not. Here, again, crossing is found to have given rise to most striking progress. M. Perrier lays especial stress upon physical perfection, and particularly upon that of women. Let us accept this criterion. Is purity of blood the sole cause of this beauty? If this were so, in the same country, the purest populations should show the fairest women. But in France, for example, the inhabitants of Auvergne, secluded among their mountains, are undoubtedly of a purer race than the inhabitants of the plains in Southern France, where so many different races have come in contact. Well, can the women of Upper Auvergne dispute the prize with the grisette of Arles, Toulouse, or of Montpellier? These three feminine types are very distinct; they clearly point to a mixture of blood. They are not the less remarkable in the matter of beauty, and are undoubtedly superior to the women of Auvergne. In Sicily, where all the Mediterranean populations are confused together, I have observed analogous facts at Taormina, Palermo, Trapani, etc.