women per ten million of population, France is not the only nation whose nineteenth century ratio fails to equal that of the eighteenth. 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 Renaissance. These figures emphasize the promising situation in America, In another half century, it will undoubtedly be seen that while our population 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 per ten million of population. No more vital problem in connection with the social and educational 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 educational opportunities of the time for an explanation? Why is it that England, starting in the fifteenth century with the same ratio as Italy (8 eminent women per ten million of population) should rise in the eighteenth century to 73, while Italy fell to 5? Or, why has the English 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 so prominent in the eyes of the world in the eighteenth century, and her women had unusual opportunity to come into public notice, the number of eminent women on the basis of population being produced by Germany, and especially by England, was far in advance of the number being produced by France? In America, 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 determine that the latter should be second, instead of first, in the ratio of eminent women per ten million of population?
Accustomed as we are to thinking of the sphere of woman as a limited one, it is interesting to note that the 868 women became eminent in twenty-nine lines of activity, if some of the following classifications can be so designated. The distribution is as follows: Literature 337; Marriage 87; Religion 64; Sovereign 59; Actress 56; Music 49; Birth 39; Mistress 29; Scholar 20; Political Influence or Ability 19; Artist 17; Philanthropy 12; Tragic Fate 11; Heroine 10; Motherhood 10; Reformer 9; Dancer 6; Immortalized in Literature 6; Patron of Learning 6; Beauty 6; Educator 3; Revolutionist 2; Misfortune 2; Traveler 2; Adventuress 2; Physician 2; Fortune Teller 1; Conjugal Devotion 1; Criminal 1.
Of the entire group of women 38.8 per cent, won their eminence by
