Anthropology is a comparatively recent science. Barely a century has elapsed since the beginning of its serious work. The material thus far collected by anthropological science, while it might seem immense to some, is, nevertheless, still small, and what is even more important, irregular. Concerning some races and peoples the science has many thousands of measurements at its command, while other races and peoples are known from very few measurements. For this reason the science of anthropology is still a long way removed from an exact knowledge and perfect description of different races and peoples. Even in Europe, where anthropological investigations have been based on a study of the greatest number of human individuals, the distribution of various anthropological racial characteristics in different peoples and tribes of the continent were, until recently, very hard to interpret and to understand. It is the pioneer work of investigation of Deniker, Hamy and others, that has made it possible to divide the population of Europe into so-called anthropological races. Pure-blooded peoples, all of whose individuals possess the same anthropological characteristics, exist nowhere. Hardly in the most inaccessible corners of the globe, are small primitive peoples found who approach the ideal of pure-bloodedness. The great civilized peoples of the earth [160]are all of them more or less heterogeneous peoples, and show no uniform anthropological type. This is true especially of the Western and Central European cultured peoples: French, English, Spanish, Italians, even Germans. Continued commixtures, which can certainly be proved historically, have entirely eradicated the original anthropological characteristics of these civilized nations. No wonder, then, that anthropogeography, in view of these most apparent examples, has almost given up designating anthropological characteristics as the characteristics of nations.