Chapter XCI: Presence of Brachycephalic Individuals Among Eastern Tribes

---------------------+----------------------+----------------------
| Males | Females
Tribe or district +--------+-------------+--------+-------------
| Skulls |Brachycephals| Skulls |Brachycephals
|examined|in the group |examined|in the group
---------------------+--------+-------------+--------+-------------
Hurons of | | | |
southeastern Canada| 15 | 2 | 5 | —
Maine | 6 | — | 6 | —
New Hampshire | — | — | 1 | —
Massachusetts | 14 | — | 25 | —
Rhode Island | 7 | 1 | 6 | 1
Connecticut | 4 | — | 4 | —
New York | 19 | — | 18 | —
Manhattan island | 3 | 1 | — | —
Long Island | 7 | — | 5 | —
Staten Island | 6 | 2 | 3 | —
Munsee | 10 | — | 13 | 4
Other Lenape | 11 | 3 | 23 | 3
Maryland | 6 | 2 | 4 | —
Virginia | 30 | 4 | 32 | 4
+--------+-------------+--------+-------------
Total | 138 | [119]15 | 145 | [120]15
---------------------+--------+-------------+--------+-------------

[119] 10.9 per cent.

[120] 10.3 per cent.

In all these cases the brachycephaly, and frequently other features of the skulls, were such that they could not possibly be attributable to a mere fluctuation of the prevalent type.

The individuals whom such specimens represent were probably recent accretions by the tribes through marriage or adoption. Other increments of similar nature doubtless occurred in the past, and, blending more or less thoroughly with the tribes, modified the physical types of these to a greater or less extent. It is evidently due to this influence that, as will be shown later, the more southerly tribes of the region under consideration—those which were nearest the more westerly, southwesterly, and southerly brachycephals—show a higher cranial index than the more northerly and purer tribes.

The principal numerical results of the measurements derived from the Eastern Indian crania are given at the end of this section. These may be summarized briefly: The type is characterized by marked to moderate dolichocephaly in the males, and by moderate dolichocephaly to mesocephaly in the females; by medium to high vault, with occasionally a low forehead; by good size of the skull as a whole, and lack of unusual thickness of its bones; by moderately high to high face, the latter especially frequent in the males; by moderate, seldom great, breadth of face; by considerably varying orbital dimensions and index, with a predominance of mesoseme forms, but reaching, even in the averages, from microseme to megaseme; by the frequency of moderate size in the nasal aperture; by variable nasal index, with a large predominance, however, of the mesorhinic form; by a rather short palate in many instances; and by a moderate degree of facial as well as of alveolar prognathism.

CRANIAL INDEX

The distribution of the most important characteristic of the skulls, the _cranial index_, will be more clearly apparent from the next table. Owing to the paucity of crania in some of the series, there are irregularities between the males and females of the same group, and the position of the different groups in the line is probably not in every case correct. Nevertheless, certain conditions are clearly brought out. It is seen on the whole that the dolichocephaly decreases in a slight ratio from the north to the south; but its lower extreme is found on Long Island, Staten Island, and Manhattan Island, New York. The crania from these three localities show striking resemblances, and though there are also certain differences, the conclusion seems to be justified that they belong to one group. It has been suggested[121] that the Indians of Staten Island were a branch of the Lenape, but the evidence offered by the skeletal remains gives no corroboration of this. There may have been Lenape women, or even some Lenape admixture, in the Staten Island tribe, but the crania of the men show almost uniformly distinct features which identify them clearly with the Indians of Manhattan Island and Long Island.

[121] See A. Skinner in The Indians of Greater New York and the Lower Hudson, edited by Clark Wissler, _Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History_, III, 1909.