Newspaper Page Text
Our Modern “Eminent Women” Outstripping the Heroines of History
The First Attempt to Standardize the
Abilities and Value to Society of
Distinguished Women of All Periods
B¥h Dr. Har;sedl.{:ldr_ick_sen
VERY woman, in this day of woman’s in
oreasing and admitted force in the
‘ world’s affairs, will welcome a faithful
analysis of the claims of the women of history
to the title of “eminent.” Who are the emi
nent women of history, and how did they ac
quire or achieve that eminence? Were they
born to it, as in the case of certain empresses
and queens? Was eminence reflected upon
them by their eminent husbands, as in the
case of the beheaded wives of Henry VIIL of
England? Or did they achieve eminence by
the exercise of their own genfus, as did Har
riet Beecher Stowe, Lola Montez or Rosa Bon
heur?
Of still greater interest is the answer to the
question: How are these eminent women of
history to be graded in respect to their indi:
vidual degree of eminence? y
It is a matter of much satisfaction to be
able to state that such a faithful analysis has
at last been made, and all these questions an
swered in a most convincing manner in the
latest publication of the Science Press, New
York, by Cora Sutton Castle, Ph. D, in a vol
ume called, “A Statistical Study of Eminent
Women.”
Quite appropriately, Mrs. Castle first estab
lishes her standard of eminence in the case of
women, She writes:
“Dr. Francis Galton, who made the first sta
tistical study of distinguished men, defined his
use of eminent thus: ‘When I speak of an emi
nent man, I mean one who has achieveda
position that is attained by only 250 persons in
each million of men, or by one person in each
4,000.
“While my selection is closer, mathematical
ly, than Galton's, among the 868 women whom
I have designated as eminent, some are in
cluded because of circumstances over which
they had no control, such as great beauty, or
congenital misfortune. Many were born to
u eir positions; to others is due but little
c.edit for the fact that they married men
sufficiently eminent to accord them a place in
history. Some ied spectacular lives and were
notorious rather than meritorious. Many of
them were women of unusual jptellectual abil
ity and were eminent in the ordinary connota
tion of the term.”
The list is sélected and the names tabulated
according to degrees'of eminent by a system
that leaves nothing to be desired. The author
lties are six standard encyclopedias and bio
graphical dictionaries recognized by scholars
{n America, France, Germany and England.
“I retained,” writes Mrs. Castle, “for my list
the name of every woman noted in any three
out of the six enclyclopedias or dictionaries.
My original intention was to eliminate from
the lower end of the group until I had 1,000,
a convenient and sufficiently large number with
which to work. But when I had discarded the
twenty-three RBiblical characters the entire
number was only 868, It is a sad commentary
on the sex that from the dawn of history to
the present day less than 1,000 women have
accomplished anything that history has record
ed as worth while. One cannot evade the
question, is woman innately so inferior to man,
or has the attitude of civilization been to close
the avenues of eminence against her?
“When the list of 868 names was completed,
1 foilowed Professor Cattell's method of arrang
ing them in order of merit. Counting the num
ber of lines accorded the women of my list
in the different encyclopedias or dictionaries,
the following results were obtained:
Total Number Ave. Lines
Authority. No Lines. of Women. per Woman.
Lippincott... 8,476 727 11.6
La Rousse.., 13,483 704 19.1
American.... 13,151 544 24.1
Brockhaus... 14,804 612 24.1
Meyer....... 15,301 631 242
Britannica... 27,284 516 52.8
“In order to reduce the results to a common
standard, that of ten being selected in this
case, it was necessary in each instance to
divide the number of lines accorded a woman
in Lippincott by 1.2; in La Rousse by 1.9; in
the Americana by 2.4; as also in Brockhaus
and Meyer; and in the Britannica by 5.3. By
adding the results from the different authori
ties a figure was obtained which determined
the position of the woman in the series of 868.
The date of birth and death, when known is
added for purposes of identification, as well
as the figure obtained as explained above which
determines her position in the order of merit.
Those designated by a star are known to have
been married one or more times, those desig
nated by a dagger have not married. The con
jugal relation of those not designated is un
known to the writer.”
As an illustration of this method of selection
the first twenty-two entries in Mrs. Castle’'s
list are here quoted:’ .
Name. No. of Lines.
#aMary StUBPL «..coveennnarsnanesnanes 607?7
tJeanne A’ATC ......ocooseesesasescces 5.13.'12
#Victoria of England ....coceveescnens 533.34
tElizabeth of lingland........ococvrees 441.15
#Sand, GEOTrge ......o..coonsecrvsases 412.04
#Stael-Holstein, Anne Germaine :
Noeker 0 .......ococcovqsrgsovenss 362.20
*Catherine 11. of Russia ......ccovvees 34.9.66
*Maria Theresa of Austria......ee...t 269.06
*Marie Antoinette of France........... 224.99
*Anne of England..........ccovniencce 210.(:;7
#Sevigne, Marie de Rabutin-Chantal de zog.b}
#Mary 1. of Bngland ......cccoevcvunns 195.87
#Eliot, GEOTZe .......ccccrsmevscansscs 191.§:I
tChristina of Sweden .........cccooee 190.!33
*Browning, Elizabeth Barret ......... 183.73
#Maintenon, Francois D’Aubigne ...... I§2.:}'3
#Josephine, Empress of France ....... 1:4.-2
#(Catherine de Medici ......ccocooenes 119.09
SCIEONAITE ... ... .. icirasecansnssscone 16_._.66
#Stowe, Harriet Beecher ..., .cceev-- 1?.;40
#Brponte, Charlotte ........cevevcveecs 1:Ȥ.20
tCorday, Charlotte ............covnevcr 14‘9.00
From the viewpoint of the average American
reader, Mrs. Castle’s “order of merit” contah-n_s'
some surprises. For example, Ouida is No. 1?4
in the list while Mary Wollstonecraft Godv;v;n
(author of “Frankenstein”) is No. 13; ‘_Letma
Bonaparte (mother of Napoleon 1) is No. 821,
and our own Harriet Martineau No. 52; but
Mary Baker Glover Eddy (founder of Christian
Science) is Nor 127, while Emma Abbott is No.
798.
It is necessary to remember, however, that
this “order of merit” is founded not upon
national or local celebrity, but upon interna
tional historical scholarship—upon the number
of lines awarded in authoritative written his
tory. Upon this point Mrs. Castle says fur
ther:
“According to our standard of measurement
Mary Stuart is the most eminent woman of his
tory. She has no close competitor. Her repu
tation, however, is greatest with English-speak
ing peoples,as is shown by the variation in
the amount of space accorded her by the dif
ferent encyclopedias used. George Sand is the
most distinguished literary woman; the chances
are even that position as fifth in order of
merit is correctly determined. The most emi
nent woman of American birth is Mrs. Stowe,
who ranks twentieth; the chances are even
that, had additional or different encyclopedias
been used in compiling the list, her position
would be between 17 and 21.
“These twenty women form a diverse group.
Phey represent six centuries and nine national
ities. Cleopatra is the most distinguished
woman of the pre-Christian era. - As far as pre
eminently gifted women are concerned, the
record is blank from the first century before
Christ until the birth of Jeanne d’Arc in 1411.
Four of the twenty most eminent women be:
long to the sixteenth century, four to the sev
enteenth, five to the eighteenth and five to the
anineteenth.
“Half of the twenty most eminent women
were sovereigns, one ruling as a' regent, the
others in their own right. Six became eminent
in literature, five of these being prose writers,
and Mrs. Browning, the pre-eminent poetess.
Marie Antoinette, the unfortunate queen of
Louis XVL, and Josephine, who might be called
ooth the fortunate and unfortunate wife of
Napoleon I, owe their positions to marriage.
Madame de Maintenon is noted for her politi
cal influence, and Jeanne d’Arc was a religious
enthusiast.
“France and England each produced six of
the twenty most eminent women of history.
Austria, Scotland, Sweden, Italy, Germany,
Russia, Egypt and America have each one rep
resentative,
“Jeanne d’Arc. led her people to victory at
Orleans, won a place in the catalogue of the
saints, and was burned at the stake at twenty.
Marie Antoinette at thirty-eight, and Mary
Stnart at forty-five, were sent to the guillotine.
Clegpatra committed suicide at sixty-one, and
Mrs. Stowe lived to the ripe old age of eighty
five.
“A list of this sort makes possible compari
sons which are not ordinarily evident, and
could not otherwise be made, and the known
probable error makes it possible to determine
within what limits the comparisons are true.
Charlotte Bronte and Charlotte Corday seem
ingly have nothing in common, yet their re
spective number in order of merit are 21 and
22, Marie Brinvilliers, whose mania for poison
ing makes it impossible to classify her as any
thing but a criminal, just precedes Genevieve
the patron saint of Paris. Joanna Baillie, the
poet; Mrs. Siddons, the actress; and Beatrice
Cenci, whose beauty and tragic fate have been
preserved for us in the colors of Guido Reni and
in the lines of Shelley, are numbered 89, 90
and 91 respectively.”
One of the most striking truths brought out
in this eompilation is the steady increase in
the number of eminent women recorded in
history, century by century, since medieval
times. The tenth century produced 6, the
twelfth, 12; the fifteenth, 32; the sixteenth, 45
the seventeenth, 84; the eighteenth, 213, and
the nineteenth, 335. Of course a large part of
this increase is due to the impetus which the
invention of movable types and the printing
press gave to the business of recording his
tory—the same influence whichk¢brought about
a general spread of enlightenment among
women as well as among men. If Sappho and
a few other eminent women of ancient times
are excepted, eminence by right of personal
achievement is confined to the women who
lived and labored during the last five centuries.
But as an offset to this showing for modern
women, as Mrs., Castle points out, was the con
current increase in the population of the
Western civilized world—from 45,000,000 in
1480 to 326,260,222,
The distribution of eminent women by
nationality and locality affords interesting com-
Translated from Unpublished Writings by
Permission of His Daughter, Mme. Pischari.
OMEN are right when they love
Christianity. It is their work, a re
ligion spread by a woman. Look at
the saintly women who surrounded Jesus and
Paul! What a grand role they played in the
history of the Apostles! How they followed
the Apostles on their journeys and cared for
them. Look at the greetings of Paul at the
end of his Epistles! Heavens, how zealous were
these men! Hdéw eagerly they all went to
work!
. . -
The old are worthy of admiration, but this
admiration for them is very silly. We only
admire that in them which coincides with our
customs and our perceptions.
* - *
In our century one does not work for pos
terity. Politics absorb everything, and the po
litical writings are transient. Well, then, what
does it matter about style and taste?
¥ g
Our century combines all extremes. It is too
obscure and too positive, too effeminate and too
frivolous. One is justified in designating it as
serious in the sense that theré is no laughter.
The century of Louis XIV. laughed when it had
to laugh; in the eighteenth century one was
gay and merry; and in our century one doesn’t
laugh, not even when one writes satire and
light poetry.
. - -
Yesterday I saw a little girl as she was say
ing the Lord's Prayer, and I noticed that she
did not know what she said nor to whom she
was speaking. That doesn’t matter, for it is
well that man accustoms himself to speak to
something invisible. That educates in him the
sense of the invisible. I can understand that a
superficial observer would ridicule it. In fact
there is no logic in it. But [ do not love all
those attempts to bring logic into teaching.
.
I,*‘% ;
i
L %
fi”
’ 3 ;
b
B TR
g T
¥ P .
.
FACTRR . L e
o- i NFLD
« R ey SR g
. B 4 WY
g " LRy Bl 5%
Y s,§ T o
3 Y ? ;3 6%
L ;::? 3 "5 "é"«a \.g:%
£ : ;?;:g» : "
ey . B Sk
LR | TRV
- . ,:*3*:
4)EI . & T i
& § w ,4:%:\4 z X X
. e $ 4 i ~‘,,!_‘ ‘,\ % )
e 3 s
oSR b %w b
N Y R e G X el
~ N W, ae 5
/ _w ~.,.. N G _ L >
igl R S
ij ’W e e iy S T
O & S T B
Joan of Arc, Made Eminent by Her Faith
That Saved France.
parisons. To quote Mrs. Castle:
“England has furnished eight more distin
guished women than France. Germany ranks
third with 114; America, only two centuries
old, is fourth. Italy produced 60, Rome 41,
Austria 24, and Spain 23 eminent women.
Russia claims 20, Sweden 16, Greece 15 and
Scotland 14. Twelve of the eminent women
belong to the Byzantine Empire, 11 to Holland
and 9 to Ireland. Twenty-seven nations each
produced fewer than ten eminent women.
“Of the 75 American women of ability it
is interesting to note that 20 were born in
Massachusetts; 15 in New York; 7 in England.
Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Penn
sylvania each claim 4; 3 are natives of South
Carolina and 3 of Qhio; 2 were born in Illinois.
Ireland, Canada, the District of Columbia, Mary
land, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, Alabama
and California each produced one eminent
woman. In other werds, New England has
produced 33, or more than twice as many as
New York; 9 are of foreign birth, and 8 are
southern women. Only one eminent American
woman was born west of the Mississippi River.
Youthful Thoughts By Ernest Renan
That makes man pretentious and causes him
to believe that he is the standard for every
thing, and it hinders him from looking and find
ing anything exceptional or mysterious. He
limits everything to his narrow and little
faculty of perception, extending no farther
than a metre in circumference. In this way
children originate who know everything and
men who jeer at enthusiasm and the super
sensual.
* * *
The literature of a people and of the uncul
tured is totally different from that of the cul
tured. But it too is true and beautiful, in spite
of the fact that the cultured ridicule it and do
nét find it natural. That which the cultured
call pathos is, with the people, a very natural
and true emotion which finds its expression
through genuine tears. It is not a learned liter
ature. It is full of anachronisms, but what does
that matter? These uncultured are ighorant,
not like the creators of dramas and novels, but
half ignorant, like the poets who sacrifice them
selves and adapt themselves to that which is
common. 7
A mean trick on the part of the class-teacher
condemned me to the sad and sorrowful fate
of having to accompany the pupils to see the
fireworks and to take a walk with them in the
Champs-Elysees. [ took this opportunity to
make a number of interestin@ and noteworthy
observations regarding the péople. A perform
ance, a very spectacular play, which occurred
in the open, served my purpose in a most preg
nant manner. [ had already noticed at per
formances of monkeys that the people dlsgll.ayed
the liveliest sympathy for the animals. here
is something between them which seems like
a secret understanding. It is only necessary
to see the sparkling eyes of the spectators, to
hear their exclamations, and to observe their
understanding of every intelligent expression
of the animals. In the great spectacular play,
“The Musketeers,” this showed itself still more
caaracteristically. The idea of a performance
o % e > oy PR Vo 4RL (8 S S RPN SIRSTE R NIRRT SR S || |
: e : S ik SRR R R Y SRR R S s i e B ;
b s e S R I TB S R e e B
2 B 8 SR Sl S R s o oe el RN 4 .
A ? ; S g AR oA SR R RTR - R S
it S R e AT BOOT b 5 e 3 :
ERE B PG i(O B %) 0 S ‘
b o s, B e -;s'»6:"’ oM
3 ! ; ; B Yo A s e
b T SRR By IR W,.;Wfiwg w.-‘%;‘,:\;;;.,@‘ \.“,.., e FEE
R S B> Ve SR NSSRA R A ov b RIS BRI TN 5 1 o3LO SR B
2R Tol WRSv R el S PRSI e SRR i' i
S S e ER SRR SRR TG < AU EEL SRR 5 T RIS S
Bo{ SR s PR S .1.1,.-x)‘.:‘v‘-,; 8 )“c‘ RDR A SRN B
225 SRR TR 3 SR AR eAt 3 Pt & g.\:'f" R e
R 4 g ; Ril &) GREER < sGt g s
(W 1] 950 gl s e B A g L e T ¢ S PR
Dot e ; | DEDR oy e “P‘-ru O;L SR b A o )
,;«-\. DIUE ! d e R s sAk W BRI R e g s
TR 38 vl A RS IR R RS B g Sy
PELY it N " 5 PR e AR R T A B Py LS -
G % B - S e A PR RN oY £t
2 e 3 5 » Sy B e AP SRR Vg ¢ y x % 14
% R "t oo R fiw!w SR b RSR A PRk
R33&2%eRL i A o e Rod e
B & Sl 1 A ? 458 l S
T 8 * \‘;\ PR F VN P PR 5 " ¢
SBN. S A o
AT 3 % e ol R AN o ; e
oAR v (5N i \-X:\ % ok P DR 5 LN ] B
G i B %0 G T N S f b
g BRI 4 A 3 §
gy . 4558 = % R ORNE . & 5 PR
R 3 i 3 S R O, TR ¢ S
fxged ¢ ; AR 7T R T s s i ST, T
HR TP oModsed eey o g o g p Sy 4o s , ¥ EoE
e¥2BsTßy TR T ¢ : :
e ol O RN T L e LS i .
EERE RS YRS - b < g 3 ¢ IR
e ¢ b e & it b e RS SRR A 3 i 5
e L 3 4 ERERY RS R g ire
ol & : R o RIS e s
Bk 3 X 4 v gl O R L g
:g*}fi\ 5 A SR RS S R SRR w- Ps S ERBCH 3 3
R S e 2 B R TR v o " $
R b o YRR AR B G R A
W | e e A RS S LR S 3 T e
<34“ SR y b T AGG .';’k. ,v ‘/ <§‘ e 4 80% & Z
e i 3 R \8 T K e
bRt SRSy TR R, G ARME L . : b e
AR o § LoLr i e e v e O Sl R R (3
R e RSB s S g A 8
R ok s y% Ge R R §
B Y e J:W’ PR R S T R TR e
s 3 A St S § o GARE b SORBERCRA oSt AR R g B
LR R a 8 | R R S A T R s T Bil
LS St S R S YRSR R O A :
R i Bk S e R N et A S ;
SRR : % GoLy S R o -;,_,.‘fzs,(' A RO L R v
o e s R O e i e :
R R e e&S S e
ROy ,)v%&, sst TN SRR R
Bra s e R S NG ,:‘ g L g : s e
Ne N eTe R S R B oy
: CwIE e e e \
s Bl R S N i
w ¥
AR R -7:;\_;_' e
~a e " e ’ é"';:“: )
’, bPN A G
gB §o s ?f“"‘." &
o A ews T
T A SPRT R o, T o 4 %
o 4%& ey Lol
ost & z, :vz:,'!,?._,::- o
AT > j S #W«
R R "'"-:A.,"-t Y
¢ S#a - E b
oG : i
LR >
i R ‘.vgy
Harriet Beecher Stowe, Whose Emancipat
ing Novel Placed Her High Among
History's Distinguished Women.
Our figures thus accord with those of Professor
Cattell, who found the birth rate of American
gcientific men to be 108.8 per million popula:
tion in Massachusetts, and 86.9 in Connecticil,
decreasing continually at greater distances
from this centre,
At the present time American women can
plume themselves on having gained a lead
over the women of other nations that promises
to leave them vurivalled unless some political
or industria] cataclysm eventuates to their dis
advantages., The following table is reprinted
to illustrate this author’'s analysis from this
standpoint:
Number of eminent women per 10,000,000
population—
-1480 1580 1680 1780 1880
England. . 8.1 26.0 28.9 73.0 31.6
France.... 10.3 11 18.6 21.9 11.4
Ttaly.. . ... T 8 9.0 6.9 5.4 58
Germany.. —— srpes e 29.3 11.2
America.,, — ——— 15.2 13.3
From the point of view of the number of
eminent women per ten million of population,
France is not the only nation whose nineteenth
for the people became splendidly clear to me
on this occasion. I now understood the kind of
performances which must have been given in
Rome, and how they had amused the people,
and how it was necessary for the people to see
performances full of action.
One realized the truth of this, and the things
which were presented were very obvious and
very perceptible; battles, in which shooting
occurred, the storming of fortresses—very effec
tual scenes, with the stage crowded with peo
ple. Shouting and tumult are heard, but the
moment only a few persons appeared and one
heard only two persons speaking, one felt bored
no matter how exciting the dialogue might be.
When the moment came in which there was no
fighting, I heard a man say to his child who
was sitting on his shoulder: “Come on, my
boy, those people stand there as though they
were made of gingerbread.” The people de
mand that a strong impression be made upon
all the senses simultaneously; moreover, a
very strong impression; and that there be no
stinting of music or shooting. The scenes
which they liked best were those in which brag
garts and boasters appeared. The people bhe
lieve everything. I noticed one or two society
men, observerS.undoubtedly, who laughed out
of politeness. I thought of Horace, who did the
same. He looked at buffoons and jugglers, not
for the purpose of laughing at their jokes, but
to amuse himself over the spectators.
* * *
Our politicians to-day have a very comfort
able way of finding much fault and praising lit
tle. In this way they are not responsible for
anything. They simply look for that wiich is
bad and which always exists.
* . *
With the people the sense and the instinct of
a nature exists far more than it does with thse
cultured. To-day I saw in the Zoological Gar
den nice, honest folk who spent their Sunday
there, and showed an extraordinary interest in
the animals. Every movement of the animals
BA L e
e o aeR T
GeR BB R e
e e R Lo
ARG e
o el
Za bG N T e
fo eTy 5 R S
GRS R
Shtoa Foo -
g o R R A 2 . % g 8
o g i A R R A s
%FIS P G W \%“ i ¢ #
S R s K ‘{ I
G e e R . L s o CEEE
e \:%,1)3.1‘ ’4?4;3 FBN X ',};&
o ”V:W)r\ s g TRER
L T
Re&<ot $ o i
R T 2
p{%,j}zy B, - Fosdkd
e S i YRGS &
T S R . W /
LEE S e’ 58 SR
s b Cfej b 7 ,
s 4 L i e
e il i o i . Sl
S G £ 2% ! -
a 2 ¢ B o B
Ty . R
BT B % 4 TR R 1
e b ‘c{i’ o 4 ki ;
At AR 7 e
R AR e
L e ;
eS BB e W, 0 S et
SR B o £ gt
it o 0 e
BT RS S A 3
B\ e e B it L
; b 7
2T
B e
Above—Charlotte Corday, Supreme Heroine of
the French Revolution. Below—Sarah Bern
hardt, at the Head of the Acting Profession
Among Eminent Women.
century ratio fails to equal that of the eigh
teenth. Germany and, especially, England have
failed signally in this respect. Italy is the
only one of the five modern nations which at
present shows a gain in ratio of eminent women
according to population, in the last century
over the previous one She seems to be rising
out of the trough of a curve, the crest of which
was reached in her sixteenth century Renais
sance,
“These figures emphasize the promising situ
ation in America. In another half century, it
will undoubtedly be seen that while our popula
t'on increased from 3,930,000 in 1790 to 50,155,
783 in 1880, there was a corresponding increase
in the number of American women of ability
had a meaning for them. Their instinct gave
them an explanation which was nothing short
of admirable. They laughed with their whole
heart over the animals and spoke to them like
brothers. The children did the same. The
bored, however, passed them by and seemed
quite proud df their indifference. For a moment
I was myself afraid of dropping into the bad
tone of the people if I displayed my interest.
‘But I discarded this thought.
Besides, my general opinion about all these
folklike banalities is that they are often of a
nauseating shallowness. But this shallowness
is usually only external, for at the bottom there
is life and truth, Generally it is that which we
find especially in the old French heroic poetry.
Also the folklore, as simple as it may seem,
what a wonderful, true and beautiful treasure
it contains! Therefore, be not afraid to show
interest in things which concern the people,
taking for granted, of course, that you yourself
are viewing them from another and higher
standpoint.
- * *
I have observed very distinctly that when
I am in a closed room without any view—for
instance, in the corner of a church, before a pil
lar—l have immediately a strong feeling of
concentration, in contrast with the emotion of
expansiveness which I feel when looking at the
ocean. In the first case, I look for myself
within myself. But if I stand before the ocean
1 spread myself over Nature. But in each I
look for God. The visible horizon merges into
the horizon of the soul.
- * .
If love is ardent and pure, then one imagines
it to be like a religion, and believes through it
to satisfy all religious duties. For instance, ons
believes, if one feeds on it, that one is praying
enough. It is that abstract beautiful which has
taken form. Therefore one uses the expressions
“adore,” etc., which have been censored so
much by Bossuet in his sermons. Pure beauti
ful love does not really know these.
per ten million of population. No more vital
problem in connection with the social and edu
cational life of woman could be propounded
than the one revealed by these curves, Is the
racial difference an important factor, or must
one look to the social conditions and educa
tional opportunities of the time for an explana
tion? Why is it that England, starting in the
fifteenth century with the same ratio as Italy
(8 eminent women per ten million of popula
tion) should rise in the eighteenth century to
73, while Italy fell to 5? Or, why has the Eng
lish curve, which started lower than the French
and equal with the Italian, towered, since the
sixteenth century, so far above the remaining
four? How explain the fact that while France
was 8o prominent in the eyes of the world in
the eighteenth century, and her women had
unusual opportunity to come into pubiic notics,
the number of eminent women on the basis of
population being produced by Germany, and
especially by England, was far in excess of the
number being produced by France? In Amer
ica, the youngest of the five nations, what is
there to explain our present position above
Italy, Germany and France, and second only to
England? Or, .to be more insistent, what
would a comparison of modern Englisn and
American conditions reveal that would deter
mine that the latter should be second instead
of first in the ratio of eminent women per ten
million of population?
Classified by occupation, literature has pro
duced the largest number of eminent women,
and conjugal devotion the smallest number.
Here is Mrs. Castle’s table:
Cases. Cases.
Literature .........337 Reformer ........:9
Marrißgs ...sviiiii 87 ' DROCEr v .sviecens B
Religion ........... 64 Immortalized in
Sovereign ......... b 9 literature ..... 8
Actress .........,... 56 Patron of learning 6
Muslc .. iivi.iaic 49 Beauty ..iioeiveein @
Bivth 0. 80 “Badoator Jlionver B
Mistress ........... 29 Revolutionist .... 2
Skholar ....... ... 20 Misfortune ...iwe &
Political influence Traveler ... 8
or ability ........ 19 Adventuress ..... 2
ATtißt ... 00, 0. 017 i Physiclan .o iviid
Philanthropy ...... 12 Fortune teller ... 1
Tragic fate ....... 11. Criminal ........ 1
Heroine ........... 10 Conjugal devotion. 1
Motherhood ....... 10 —
Total ...iéckeißil
Regarding an occupation which formerly
was held in much less disesteem than nowa
days, the author makes this interesting note:
“The mistresses—which group includes the
early Greek courtesans—rank high, and justly
so. Our standards have changed, and while
our moral sense may be offended at seeing
twenty-nine eminent women so classified, we
are led to believe that, in many instances,
these women, whatever their morals, were in
tejlectually among the most capable of their
sex. Restricted by the social customs of their
times, they found in this relation an oppor
tunity to meet and associate with men of their
own intellectual power. Were it not so, it
scarcely seems probable that mere beauty or
pleasing personality which fascinated some
weak-minded king could have been sufficient
reason for the high degree of merit which
history has accorded them.”
It appears, however, that in modern times
marriage has been of doubtful advantage where
the eminence of women is concerned. The nine
teenth century produced seventy eminent
women who were unmarried, and the number
of this unmarried group decreases steadily
backward through the centuries. The author
summarizes as follows:
“The 142 unmarried eminent women can not
be said to have won greater eminence than
those who married; their average length of
life was not longer; 72,5 per cent of the un
married group belong to the last two centuries,
and 59.8 per cent of them are English and
American,
“29.8 per cent of the eminent women mar
ried men of sufficient distinction to fall within
our criterion of eminence selected for the
women. Twelve of these men were married
to mora than one of the eminent women, and
twenty-two of the women had more than one
eminent husband. The women with eminent
husabnds were chiefly of French, English, Ger
man, Roman, Italian, Spanish, Byzantine and
Austrian birth, The average eminence of these
women is high, but it is, in part, a glory re
flected from their husbands, since 84, or 32.4
per cent of this group are classified under
‘Marriage.’
“Eminent women of the nineteenth century
have married ten years later in life than those
of the twelfth century. There were a few
fifteen-year-old brides in the last century, but
there was also one of sixty-seven. In the
fourteenth century, the oldest eminent bride
was eighteen, and in the fifteenth century,
twenty-six.
“Reformers and musicians marry latest in
life. The average age of eminenf Russian
brides is 18.4 years; of American, 27.7 years.
“Kminent women have not, on the whole,
made particularly successful wives, since 11.6
per cent..of the 781 unions of which we have
record have ended in separation or divorce;
36 of the 91 cases of dissolution occurred in
families where both husband and wife were
famous. But since twelve of these women are
classified under ‘Marriage’ and two under
‘Birth,’ the real facts for the women who won
their eminence by personal effort are that 9
writers, 5 actresses, 3 musicians, 2 mothers, 1
scholar, 1 politician, and 1 woman famous for
her religion, were separated from husbands
who were also eminent.
“Divorces have been most frequent among
distinguished women of German birth. Except
in.families of aristocratic extraction, divorces
and separations are recorded only since the
seventeenth century.
“The eminent women_have lived to an aver
age age of 60.8 years. There is a correlation
between degree of eminence and length of life
since the most eminent third of the group of.
women lived to an average of 3.3 years longer
than the least eminent third. Length of life
has increased through the centuries, the aver
age age in the fourteenth century being 48.7
vears, and in the nineteenth century, 62.7
years. Philanthropists and reformers are the
only groups whose average length of life ex
ceeds the allotted three score years and ten.
“It is interesting to know that American
women of ability live on the average 2.8 years
longer than Scotch women, 3.5 years longer
than German women, 6.4 years longer than
english women, and 7.9 years longer than the
eminent women of France, Since we are a young
nation, we must take into consideration the
fact that our average is not reduced by early
deaths in earlier centuries, as is the case
with older countries, but it is also unquestion
ably truse that our position in this table reficcts
credit on the physical vigor of the American
people as wel] as upon our hygienic and sani
tary conditions and the skill of American
physicians and surgeons.”