Chapter IV: Munsee Crania: Relation of Skull Capacity to Stature24

MALES
-------------+-----------+--------+---------------
| | |Femoro-cranial
| | | index (= c.c.
|Bicondylar | Skull | of skull
Number | length of |capacity| capacity
|right femur| | per 1.0 cm.
| | | of femoral
| | | length)
-------------+-----------+--------+--------------
| _cm._ | _c.c._ |
285,305 | 43.4 | 1,530 | 35.3
285,301 | 44.2 | 1,515 | 34.3
285,308 | 45.1 | 1,720 | 38.1
285,303 | 45.1 | 1,515 | 33.6
285,313 | 45.3 | 1,550 | 34.2
285,326 | 46.6 | 1,470 | 31.5
285,306 | 48.1 | 1,505 | 31.3
+-----------+--------+--------------
| (7) | (7) | (7)
Averages | (45.4) |(1,544) | (34.0)
Exclusive of | | |
285,308 | 45.4 | 1,514 | 33.3
-------------+-----------+--------+--------------
FEMALES
-------------+-----------+--------+--------------
285,302 | 39.4 | 1,295 | 32.8
285,327 | 40.2 | 1,225 | 30.4
285,320 | 42 | 1,280 | 30.5
285,309 | 42.3 | 1,300 | 30.7
285,310 | 43 | 1,375 | 32.0
285,321 | 43.5 | 1,310 | 30.1
285,304 | 43.8 | 1,275 | 29.1
285,307 | 44.7 | 1,240 | 27.7
| (8) | (8) | (8)
Averages | 42.4 | 1,288 | 30.4
-------------+-----------+--------+--------------

[24] Arranged on the basis of stature (i. e., length of femur).

COMPARATIVE DATA

MALES
--------------+-----------+--------+-------------
Arkansas (5) | 45.1 | 1,446 | 32.1
Louisiana (7) | 44.4 | 1,434 | 32.3
--------------+-----------+--------+-------------
FEMALES
--------------+-----------+--------+-------------
Louisiana (5) | 41.7 | 1,330 | 31.9
--------------+-----------+--------+-------------

MALE MUNSEE SKULL, NO. 285,303, U.S.N.M. (SIDE VIEW)]

The results presented in the table show considerable individual variation in the femoro-cranial index, by reason of which there is some irregularity of alignment of the cases. This is especially true in regard to the capacity, which in this small series shows little regularity or evidence of conformity with the aforementioned general rule of increase of the size of the head with stature. The tallest of the eight females had one of the smallest heads, and the man with the largest brain was not even of average height. However, there is no doubt that if the series of skulls was considerably larger, the usual progression, showing gradual increase in the size of the brain with the height of the body, would be apparent.

The femoro-cranial index progresses much more regularly than the capacity, and shows another well-known fact, also common to all human races, namely, that while the absolute size of the brain enlarges in proportion to the stature, its relative dimensions with reference to stature diminish as the latter increases; so that while the tall man or woman may be expected to have an absolutely larger brain than the average of his group, relatively to his stature he will have less brain matter than the short individuals of the same group.

The averages in the preceding table are interesting in another particular—i. e., the difference in the value of the femoro-cranial index in the two sexes. Both the former records of the Louisiana crania and those of the Munsee now presented show these indexes to be perceptibly lower in the females than in the males. The superiority in this respect among the male crania is seen not only in the averages, but practically throughout the records, seven of the eight indexes in the females being below the minimum of the indexes in the males. It seems evident that among the Indians the brain substance in the females is not only absolutely smaller than in the males, but is also somewhat smaller for each centimeter of stature, so that men of the same height as the women would still show an advantage in this particular. This advantage is not necessarily connected with mentality, but may be due to the greater muscularity of the males.

As to the value of the femoro-cranial index in different tribes, we can as yet say nothing positive. The indications are that if differences exist, they are not of a very pronounced character.

SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE FACE

The measurements chosen, as in the writer’s work previously cited, are only the most essential. They include the total and upper length of face, and the three breadth measurements—the smallest breadth of the forehead, the greatest facial breadth in the plane of the zygomatic arches, and the breadth at the angles of the lower jaw. As to the total facial length (chin-nasion), wherever the teeth were worn due allowance for the wear was made on the basis of measurements on well-preserved teeth of the same sex and in the same group.

The results, presented in the next table, show that among the Munsee the face was of only fair height and that its other dimensions were rather subdued for Indians.