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
VERY woman, tn this day of woman's in-
E creasing 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 certaln empresses
and queens? Was eminence reflected upon
them by thelr eminent husbands, as in the
case of the beheaded wives of Henry VIIL of
England? Or @id they achleve eminence by
the exercise of their own gentus, as dfd Har
riet Beecher Stowe, Lola Montez or Rosa Bon
heur?
Of stil] 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?
It {8 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
uge 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
1 have designated as eminent, some are in
cluded because of circumstances over which
they had no coutrol, such as great beauty, or
congenital misfortune. Many were born to
J eir positions; to others is due but little
c.edit for ihe fact that they married men
sufficiently eminent to accord them a place in
history. Some led spectacular lives and were
notorious rather than meritorious. Many of
them were women of unusnal intellectual abil
ity and were eminent in the ordinary connota.
tion of the term.)”
The list is selected and the names tabulated
according to degrees of eminent by a system
that leaves nothing to be desired.. The author
ities are six standard encyclopedias and bio
graphical dictionaries recognized by scholars
in America, France, Germany and England,
“] 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,
& convenient and sufficiently large number with
which to work. But when I had discarded the
twenty-three Biblical charscters the entire
number was only 868. It is a sad commentary
on the sgex 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, 18 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 16.1
American.... 13,151 544 24.1
Brockhaus... 14,804 612 24.1
Maeyer....... 15,301 631 242
Britannica... 27.284 S 52.8
“In order to reduce the results to a common
standard, that of ten being selected in this
case, 1[ was necessary in each instance to
divide the number of lines accorded a woman
in Lippincott by 12; in La Rousse by 1.9; in
the Americana by 24; 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 coa
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
ligt are here quoted:
Name. No. of Lines.
BRI BUORTT ... s diaiiaens BULAT
SEARNS A'AYD .. ity R3OS
sVictoria of England it iiianasns DA
RENsabeEth of England. ... ... .c.voooe S4LI6
#Sand, George SR e R
#Stael-Holstein, Anne Germaine
MEBREY 08 ... i sy a 8
SCatherine JLOf Russla ... ..cvivvers 04088
SMaria Theresa of Austria. . . iias..oo. 269,08
*Marie Antoinette of France........... 22499
Thnne of BORIARR. .. ... i i vinsivivee 21087
eSevigne, Marie de Rabutin-Chantal de 208.61
SNy ol Bnplang .\ (i iiaisasoey 29D 8T
sEliot, George .. A b anLel
HChrlsting of Bweden ... .. ivesee 13068
*Browning, Elizabeth Barret ........, 183.73
#Maintenon, Francois D'Aubigne ...... 182.33
#Josephine, Empress of France ....... 17423
satherine de Mediel ... ... i, vas. 17009
*Cleopatra R Ll TR s
*Stowe, Harrlet Beecher ..., cicivev. 16740
mßronts, Charlotta .. ... ciisivasnsss 10830
‘arday, Charlotte s T
tvom the viewpoint of the average American
reader, Mrs. Castle’s “order of merit” contains
gome Surprises For exan ple, Ouida is No. 157
ix the list while Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin
{author of “Frankenstein”) is No. 72: Letitia
onaparte {mother of Napoleon | !\“.\'u <M
d our own Harrict Martineau No. 52 l
ary Baker Glover Bddy (founder of Christian
§‘)é‘nfl is No. 127, while Emma Abbott is No.
Llk 15 Roteaaly to remember, hawever, that
tals “order of merit” is founded mot upon
national or local celebrity, but upon interna
tional historical scholarship-—upon the number
By Dr. Hans Huldricksen
The Famous Swedish Sociologist
of lines awarded in anthoritative written his
tory. Upon this point Mrs. Castle says fur
ther:
“According to our standard of measurement
Mary Stuart {s 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.
They represent six centuries and nine national
jties. Cieopatra 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
nineteenth.
“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
Louls XVL, and Josephine, who might be called
poth the fortunate and unfortunate wife of
Napoleon I, owe their positions to marriage.
Madame de Maintenon is noted for her politi
ral 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
regentative .
“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
Stuart at forty-five, were sant to the guillotine,
Cleopatra commlitted suicide at sixty-one, and
Mre. Stowe lived to the ripe old age of eighty
five,
“A list of this sort makes npossible compari
sons which are not ordinarily evident, and
conld not otherwise be made, and the known
probahle 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 nomber in order of merit are 21 and
22, Marie Brinvilliers, whose mania for poison
ing makes it {fmpossible to classify her as any
thing but a criminal, just precedes Genevieve
the patron saintsof Paris. Joanna Baillie, the
poet; Mra, 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 compilation {s the steady increase in
the number of eminent women recorded in
history, century by ecentury, 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 which 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 night of personal
achlevement 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 eivilized world—from 45,000,000 fn
1450 to 326,260,222,
The distribution of eminent women by
nationality and locality affords interesting com-
Trqns!atcd from Unpublished Writings by
Permission of Mis Daughter, Mme. Pischarl.
OMEN are right when they love
Christianity. It is their work, a re
liglon 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! How 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
loes it matter about style and taste?
- - -
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 there 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,
99
Yesterday 1 saw a little gir]l 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
gense of the invisible. 1 can understand that a
superficial observer would ridicule it. In fact
there is no logic in it. But I do not love all
those attempts to bring logi® iate teaching.
i% ‘
ko '_" 1 ‘
1
5
4 Y
i £ £
_ :”"‘w \_',;;jf_ e¥ R R
b e B R e
Pk A % R
e b -;4‘_
B i R YRS
& ho ‘ ] g 3
g S
) 3552 5
\ L '
A ) g 809 i
G S gy R i
o A g 4 Sl T
R ko ‘Ehgj‘“ b
B 35 P k ‘i"’ flJ .)"t‘;
e S tv“f N w o
S QPR TR B T AT
e ‘~ ‘,’».‘k"'-.-; :.I" " E 'm-;’\ P
- N B AR
; b W IS -
o : T .
. 3 RO
v @Wfi . J
: —" oS
: o TR
o i it VI
!’f Mu ? ',“3 23 T ?% 3
i R 2L bl %
RN sk s e oy
‘“;_ N o 3 o A e
5 4 § e ; '/’
Joan of Arc, Made Eminent by Her Falth
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
gylvania each claim 4; 3 are natives of South
Carolina and 3 of Ohio; 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 words, 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.
f w 8
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
not 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 ignorant,
not like the creators of dramas and novels, but
half ignorant, like the poets who sacrifice them
selves and adapt themselves to that whick is
common.
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 interesting and noteworthy
observations regarding the people. 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 displayed
the liveliest sympathy for the animals. Thers
is something between them which seems like
a secret understanding. It is only necessary
to see the sparkling eves 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
characteristically. The idea of a performance
- e I T A R DR | |
TA T R RTR RN TRke o e
A R e R e Dot e eeS TN
RSR Bet B S W At BT LN
%\ RA G i" v“,g‘}(\, 5 e 34 :3% e 98 " 3 ,c;{-(&\"@\,g“‘
TN KR % i ’ s . e " s eOS Re i
I ; { ek 3 S Be T )*&%Q'z*’fifi
A ; : / ) p H AT Tolst B TR N R b e o 4f,~‘,§s§°’ BE
O GRS g L 5 < ROIF o AR : e RSRAR R
Vi o 3 A S RS <At e
R Bov R el
S S ey 3 T £ ; B 6 '*"é‘@t‘:
B e R A AR S SRR
% : 2 . ¥ Rel Sk : : b a 0 o n
T g > o R S Ry et s B
BT : % M 53 WA AR e e Aoty By NP SR S o &;Q:xfifl;--f‘-‘ v
584 ; Ie S RS s D T AR e
S S 5 &w ho e Rt e y G f;:wlk(é :
SR e [S R e 3 A R o LN e N I G B
b - AL : A [ Redimatl, < W PN s
. R e YASAT GEN L D Ay e f i ¥ s AXO 5 e sR S
A O b 7 o A f o ik 5&4 4 i SRRORE TRt i- AR e
AR RN R B SR e SOl
M gy e : i . g o : : EE SR A R
SN-5.-o ey - L . o B
:5"» ? ; 5 fl o, iy P '§ Sh i i oy ~,;fi,.-.‘*-f'»‘\'f'
By 3 ¢ P b 2 4 A ; ; G B RASE ARG
i, S 3 o o : R
A S Bz 107 T e i e B oS
L K SRR 5 \s b ¥ S s b .é e
SSR @ g W Bs N e B e
o B -Ho RS~ SORERE o g 3 2 ARG,
Y R 4 P & B¢ 5 s R PR L - RPR S SRR
e He sSR e, R T TOO G Al
AeN.B d e RN
S L& : S R R Kl 8 % R N
Re R : ' T e
R e R A : R ; L
b ; P D RTa s o \i 5.5 A PRI R TR
R Yol : e ifi@: 4 A R o S e
e e ; oYT S e R
S R EE 8 BTR S % S
G T e e 3 R R > St
il SR R 2 PRERNL ot SSN & SRR
¢ kise S S S e ; R (\,( b g A b R
W|| e A e i R i b
S AR A ; j »\E},",. i e
:'*g’ p: 27 S ,y’?}:’i’»: %O i S N A e % ey
R e ik # % : ; G > <
g R A s 0 75 S S p o 2 S A FAE g _ e
e iy iefer e S i e o i
TSN Rel S B 00 L RRO B ) ¢
SLB o : 5
e iy W'?J/ s jg;‘:g KL s R s
R R 38 R G RS R e S ‘ D A 2 7
LR e 4 2 E R 44PR O 3 (%3 ?Et PR ¢ “ y: v ”* Y
e Seaes e %z’ R R A S -
e £
@ saoes T RR S AU R R P e i 7
S TRAE R Re R i G
B ks fi*’@” e e b
SR s T S B B e A i R
G R
f:.., R S S
S TR o o NGB SN
R P WG N
S CEe M T i
Sty s % A S
G N ey TSR R :
s g, S R ik
Ghhai e 3;:4":..;-"; G
£ gt T o S
%s Y 5
G e P
sais B l},";{g, g
fi k‘{? e
4 TR R Sy 7
% U-’--,;? i e
\ 1
S % “’-. % e P
Harriet Beecher Stowe, Whose Emancipat
ing Nevel Placed Her High Among
History’s Distinguished Women.
Our figures thus aceord with those of Professor
Cattell, who found the birth rate of American
scientific men to be 108.8 per million popula
tion in Massachusetts, and 86.9 in Connecticul,
decreasing continually at greater distances
from this centre,
At the present time American women cah
plume themselves on having galned a lead
over the women of other nations that promises
to leave them vurivalled unless some political
or industrial 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.. B§Bl 26.0 28.9 73.0 31.6
France.... 10.3 113 18.6 21.9 114
1ta1y.... .. ‘lB 9.0 6.9 5.4 5.8
Germany.., —— —— —— 29.3 11.2
America... — —_— — 15.2 13.3
From the point of view of the number of
eminent women per ten milllon 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 beasters appeared. The people be
lieve everyvthing. 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 joxes, but
to amuse himself over the spectators.
. - -
Qur politicians to-day have a very comfort
able way of finding much fault and praising lit
tle. In this way they are mot responsible for
anything. They simply look for that which is
bad and which always exifts.
. .
With the people the sen{: and the instinet of
a nature exists far more than it does with the
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 animels. Every movement of the animals
W 0 G
W f?fif:‘#?fiif’.’%ifif=is'3s'-'fif"::s" S
\ S /%:\%‘( :
R R R G --":::?5;’:5::55511'5:::.55:’:15-55555:5‘:53:5~5'5.:'3 A
Pt na T S SRR R R
| o SRR TR G ¥~§\ L
; ;}“?&‘ G R Be an
Py s
s B
GB A 2
“W N, w 0
T R e G
B ‘%}A eB4, g P, o S
eR R VRS o ¥ 32
::;-.2‘3'&&;:::;-. Eemoe S 2 ey i Eogga
s e ”‘ %
o W am A O
Beolaa s s - o f- 2 o
o T BRI, R S £ %
e e - T S o
Le e 9 &L
: L 'f*“ SRR i e
! e PR e A s B
o e T
M T f 5 R
e e i 3 AT o
3 BB i &
e R e S o i
eRSN! M e o b
o & o A e SR L
Copmßy -eyA s AR P & %
Lo AR o ¥ S RTN
0 0 g
SeEc o T S U
LR LN B
@t k- P G
5 D OANSe Pl PR Gy
) i?;. e 4 P A o S
e, 08 S e 0
9L M . A f
e ot
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 Renals
sance.
“These figures emphasize the promising situ
ation in America. In another half century, it
will undoubtedly be seen that while our popula
tion 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 of their indifference. For a moment
1 was myself afraid of dropping into the bad
tone of the people if. 1 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 1
look for God. The visible horizon merges into
the horizon of the soul
. e 9
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, one
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 heauti
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 faclor, 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 57 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 remalning
four? How explain the fact that while France
was so prominent in the eyes of the world in
the eighteenth century, and her women had
unusual opportunity to come imto public notice,
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 English 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, Iterature ‘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
Marriage ....eec... 87 Dancer ..eceee... 6
Religion ........... 64 Immortalized in
Sovereign ..ee.eee. 09 literature ..... 6
ACLress ....0e0..... b 6 Patron of learning 6
Misin: ... i ... 40 Deßnly sisiissclc
Bisth .., ... 89 Tdueator . ...aio 8
MiStress ..0e....... 29 Revolutionist ... 2
Scholar ........... 20 Misfortine ...e.. 2
Political influence Traveler . ceoees 2
or ability ........ 19 Adventuress ...« 2
Artist .. o ...... 17 Physician (i.i.cee.d
Philanthropy ...... 12 Fortone teller ... 1
Tragic fate ....... 11 Criminal cc.ceee 1
Heroine ........... 10 Conjugal devotion. 1
Motherhood ....... 10 e
Tothl .. o 808
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 insiances,
these women, whatever their morals, were in
tellectually 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; thefr average length of
life was not longer; 725 per cent of the un
married group belong to the last two centuries,
and 598 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 ig 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 sixtyseven. 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 eminent Russian
brides is 18.4 years; of American, 27.7 years.
“Eminent women have not, on the whole,
made particularly successful wives, since 11.6
per cent. of the 781 unions of which we havs
record have ended in separation or divorce;
36 of the 91 cases of dissolution occurred in
families where both husband and wife wure
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 hdve 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 reflects
credit on the physical vigor of the American
pecple as well as upon our hygienic and sani
tary conditions and the skill of American
physicians and surgeons.”