“Revolution is the historical expression of evolution; it is the chicken which has outgrown the embryonic stage, and is ready for life in the open, breaking through the shell.” This is a metaphor to which Lombroso returns again and again. If the new development is one with whose idea the generality have become familiar, if the old forms have become rotten, the evolutionary impulse spontaneously breaks into fresh channels. It is true that even then in some cases some force has to be applied to overcome the resistance of the adherents of the old ways; for, owing to the universality of misoneism, and to the law of inertia, such adherents will always be found, however cogent the need for innovation. Now, the characteristic of genius is its freedom from that which furnishes obstacles to progress, its freedom from misoneism—at least, in respect of progress in that particular direction towards which the particular type of genius is directed. In genius, therefore, Lombroso recognizes at once the source of all those tendencies which gradually swell to form the irresistible flood of revolution, and the helper through whose instrumentality the ultimately mature embryo is assisted to its birth. And just as, on the one hand, the genius accompanies a genuine revolutionary movement, one capable of development, from its first small beginnings down to its victorious close; so, on the other hand, the pseudo-genius, the “mattoid” criminal or the lunatic, excites revolts which oppose themselves in vain to the vis inertiæ of society, and whose sole result is to hinder the general course of evolution.

In this section of this remarkable book we find a notable stimulus, and the brilliant exposition leads us to formulate all kinds of speculation. We are induced to attempt also to draw up a prognosis. We ask ourselves what will be the outcome of such a movement as that which was initiated in Germany by Lassalle—half genius, half-moral eccentric—a movement which has found its fool and its half-fool in Neve and Most respectively, and among whose adherents even now the question is being discussed whether the old Prussian suffrage system shall be and can be destroyed and rebuilt by means of street-demonstrations and the general strike.

Lombroso utilized the relations between genius and revolution in a most remarkable manner for the purpose of studying the nature of revolution. A notable portion of his material, and unquestionably the most trustworthy portion, is constituted by the official statistics of the French elections to the Chamber of Deputies in the years 1877, 1881, and 1885. In a nation whose disposition and development have been of so monarchical a character, Lombroso proceeds, a republican vote signifies adhesion to a revolution. “In these elections we have the numerical expression of revolution in its legitimate form—a form entirely free from any criminal or insurgent features.”

In a very detailed manner he then proceeds to demonstrate the complete parallelism in France between genius and revolution—that is to say, republican sentiment—which, if not easy to display numerically, nevertheless is and has been universally dominant. Reference is also made to a kind of statistical statement of genius, which was given by Lombroso in another work, “L’uomo di genio,” 1888.[[22]] From these statistics he derives an “index of genius” for every department in France, and according to the size of this index the departments are arranged in groups. These will be seen to correspond in a most striking manner with the groups we obtain by classifying the departments according to their republican or monarchical proclivities.

This analogy is pursued yet further. In a number of interesting tables, diagrams, and charts, the French departments are grouped according to their configuration (mountains, hills, and plains), the geological character of their soil (granitic and other primary formations—jurassic, cretaceous, alluvial, etc.), according to the racial origin of their inhabitants (Ligurian, Iberian, Cymric, Ruthenian, Gaelic, Belgic, etc.), and for each group the predominant political tendency and the index of genius are determined. In this way also he deduces an analogy bordering on identity between republicanism and genius.

Apart from such analogies as these, his analysis of the electoral results in France, and his grouping of the republican and the monarchical departments according to the configuration of the surface, the geological character of the soil, and the origin of the population, are of the greatest interest; and the interest is further increased by the accompanying commentary dealing with a mass of facts relating to other countries. Thus, of thirty-six departments of a mountainous character, twenty-five are republican; whereas of ten departments in the plains, four only are republican. Lombroso gives numerous examples to show that the inhabitants of mountainous districts are inclined to more rapid evolutionary changes than the inhabitants of the plains, who are more averse to novelty. On the other hand, at very lofty altitudes indeed, an apathetic temperament and political indolence are dominant. Thus, in Mexico, the inhabitants of districts at an altitude of over 2,000 metres (6,560 feet) above the sea-level are characterized by passivity. The inhabitants of the capital city, which is situated at about this altitude, are politically indifferent, and take hardly any part in the revolutions of the country. It is the troops only, recruited from other parts of the country, which issue the pronunciamentos.

The monotonous scenery of the plains induces an equable internal state in the inhabitants, and thus strengthens in them the sentiment of misoneism. Only the proximity of large rivers, on which great industrial towns grow up, encourages a political vitality in the plains. Factors of another order may intervene, and may counteract this monotonizing influence of the plains. Here, above all, we note the effect of the crossing of races, in consequence of which the Poles, through contact and intermixture with the Germans, have undergone a notable development in civilization and political life in advance of so many other Slavonic races. In this connection, Lombroso lays especial stress upon the first effects, the nascent state, of such intercrossing of races, and refers the rapid decline in Polish evolution to disappearance of this status nascendi. (This notion of Lombroso’s is supported by the fact that the partition of Poland was followed by a renewed crossing of the Polish with the German stock, and there ensued upon this, in the middle third of the nineteenth century, and again to-day, in addition to the blossoming of a quite unexpected industrial, scientific, and literary quickening of the race, a recrudescence of the Polish revolutionary spirit. For a long time the force produced by the nascent state seemed exhausted, and the revolutionary spirit of the Poles appeared to have become metamorphosed into clericalism.)

In addition to the permanent factors of soil and race, by means of which a nation is rendered capable of pursuing a successful course of development through a series of fortunate revolutions, there are other and variable influences which give rise to a continuous rebellious unrest. Pre-eminent among these influences is a climate characterized by periods of rapidly rising temperature, whereas a tropical climate induces absolute indolence in the inhabitants, so that in tropical countries history has nothing to record regarding class-struggles, conspiracies, and serious insurrections.

The hot season in the southern regions of the temperate climes is a cardinal factor in the production of political disturbances. Lombroso has proved this by the utilization of material whose official origin appears to him to render it entirely trustworthy—namely, the data recorded in the Calendar of Gotha for the years 1791 to 1880. In this period we find an account of 836 revolts, rebellions, insurrections, etc., of which 495 took place in Europe. The maximum of the European disturbances took place in the month of July, whilst of the South American revolts, the maximum occurred in the corresponding month of the southern hemisphere—viz., January. The more recent records, relating to outbreaks in Argentina and Chile, confirm this conclusion. The smallest number of revolts occurred—in Europe, in November and December, and in South America, in May and June. If we examine the records of the individual European nations, we find that among all the nations of Southern Europe the summer is the principal time of disturbance. In the case of five nationalities (the Norwegians, Swedes, Danes, Poles, and Irish) the spring predominates. In one case only was there a maximum of revolts in winter; this was Switzerland, in which ten out of twenty-four recorded outbreaks occurred during the winter season.

Another tabulation of the figures displays the predominance of the nationalities of Southern Europe in the statistics of insurrection. In Greece there were 95 revolts per 10,000,000 inhabitants, this being the maximum; in Russia, down to the year 1900, there were 0·8 per 10,000,000 inhabitants, this being the minimum. Dividing Europe into three zones, we find that in Northern Europe there were 12 revolts, in Central Europe 25, and in Southern Europe 56, per 10,000,000 inhabitants.