Chapter XXX: Anatomical Characters (1)

I. _Osteological characters._—Without denying the very great value of external characters, I agree with almost all anthropologists, in attaching a greater importance to anatomical characters _in the majority of cases_. Unfortunately, the comparative anatomy of human races has, as yet, made but little progress. The fact is, that the solid portions, the skeleton alone, have, necessarily, been the subject of serious examination. The study of the perishable portion has scarcely been begun. For this, and several other reasons, I shall distinguish these two orders of facts, and discuss separately our knowledge of _osteological characters_ and _organic characters_.

The skeleton, the framework of the body, presents the same regions as the latter: we can distinguish the head, the trunk, and the extremities. Each of these regions offers peculiarities more or less connected with the diversity of human groups. The best studied, and fortunately the most important, are furnished by the head. For some years craniological collections have been singularly on the increase; and throughout Europe, the study has been entered upon with equal ardour. Craniometrical methods and instruments have multiplied, perhaps a little beyond the actual need. MM. Vogt and Topinard have made an excellent summary of this mass of research. I can only refer to their publications. I cannot here even reproduce all the results already acquired, and must confine myself to pointing out a few of the principal ones.

II. _Characters drawn from the cranium alone._—From an anthropological point of view, as well as in an anatomical sense, the skull is divided into two parts, the _cranium_ and the _face_. Each of these regions has its special indications, while new characters again rise from their reciprocal relations. Let us briefly review them.

The general form of the cranium depends, above all, upon the relation existing between the _length_ measured from before backwards, and the _breadth_ taken from one side to the other. The honour of having appreciated the importance of this relation belongs to Retzius. He made use of it to establish the distinction between _dolichocephalic_, or long-headed races, and _brachycephalic_, or short-headed races.

Retzius considered the relations 7 : 9 or 8 : 10 as representing the limit, left by him uncertain, of dolichocephaly and brachycephaly. M. Broca proposed the formation of a third group, which should comprise all crania, the length and breadth of which presented a relation comprised within these limits, and anthropologists now admit with him the _mesaticephalic_ races. In expressing these relations by decimals, and in creating the term _horizontal cephalic index_, now universally adopted, M. Broca has, moreover, facilitated, to an extraordinary degree, the study of this character, and the ideas to which it may give birth. His sub-division of the two extreme groups into two has also, in certain cases, been an advantage. He has himself, however, shown that it is not wise to go too far in this direction.

The definitions of dolichocephaly, mesaticephaly, and brachycephaly have, it seems to me, been somewhat arbitrary. I draw this conclusion from the following tables, which I borrow from MM. Broca and Pruner Bey. They represent the means discovered by these eminent investigators. I have merely substituted the serial order for the purely geographical distribution adopted by M. Pruner. Moreover, I have continued the calculation to the second decimal place, thus rendering the distinctions more minute, and the general result more striking.

INDICES OF HUMAN RACES AFTER M. PRUNER BEY.

Races. Indices.

Americans of the Pampas, of Bogota, etc. 0·93
Americans of Vera Paz 0·87

Germans of the south (men) } 0·86
Germans of the south (women) }

Laos }
Annamites } 0·85
Brachycephalic Turks }

Brachycephalic Malays }
Javanese }
Borneans }
Brachycephalic Peruvians } 0·84
Puelches }
Lapps }
Ancient brachycephalic Europeans }

Kalmucks } 0·83
Brachycephalic Bretons }

Brachycephalic Kanaks }
Aëtas (women) } 0·82
Ancient Europeans (women) }

Malays (women) 0·81

Brachycephalic New Guineans }
Mexicans } 0·80
Brachycephalic Peruvians (women) }
Indo-Chinese }

Tagals }
Belgians } 0·79
Dutch }

Hovas }
Papuans with aquiline nose }
Red-Skins } 0·78
Chinese (women) }
Bellovaques (men) }
Modern Greeks }

Kabyles (women) }
Jews (women) } 0·77
Kourouglis (men and women) }
New Guineans }

Intermediary Americans } 0·77
Araucanians (men) }

Chinese (men) } 0·77
Ancient Romans }

Kabyles (men) }
Aëtas (men) }
Tasmanians (women) } 0·76
Dolichocephalic Celts }
Scandinavians (men) }
Dolichocephalic Bretons }

Modern Italians (men and women) }
Arabians }
Sacalaves (men) } 0·75
New Zealanders }
Dolichocephalic Kanaks }
Micronesians }

Tasmanians (men) }
New Guineans (women) }
Dolichocephalic Turks } 0·75
Etruscans }
Phœnicians }
Scandinavians (women) }

Tahitians }
Americans of Brazil, Peru, etc. } 0·74
Araucanians (women) }

Negroes (women) }
Kaffirs }
Semitic Hindoos } 0·73
Ancient Celts (men & women) }
Irish }

Negroes (men) }
Sacalaves (women) }
Australians (women) }
Brahmans } 0·72
Dravidians }
Persians }
Bellovaques (women) }

Bosjesmans } 0·70
Hottentots (women) }

Hottentots (men) } 0·69
Esquimaux }

INDICES OF HUMAN RACES AFTER M. BROCA.

Races. Indices.

TRUE BRACHYCEPHALI.

Americans (deformed crania) { 1·03
{ 0·93

Syrians of Gébel Cheikh, slightly deformed } 0·85
Lapps }

Bavaria and Swabia } 0·84
Auvergnats of St. Nectaire }

Finns } 0·83
Indo-China }

SUB-BRACHYCEPHALI.

Alsace and Lorraine }
European Russia } 0·82
Bretons of the Côtes du Nord (Gaulish cantons) }

Javanese } 0·81
Turks }

Different Mongols } 0·81
Bretons of the Côtes du Nord (Breton cantons) }

Estonians } 0·80
French Basques }

MESATICEPHALI.

North Americans, undeformed }
South Americans, undeformed }
Non-Javanese Malays }
North French, Bronze age } 0·79
Parisians of 16th cent. }
Parisians of 12th cent. }
Parisians of 19th cent. }

Gallo-Romans }
Roumanians } 0·78
Mexicans, undeformed }

SUB-DOLICHOCEPHALI.

Spanish Basques of Zaraus } 0·77
Gauls of the Iron age }

Malgaches }
Chinese }
Copts } 0·76
Merovingian French }
Sclaves of the Danube }
Tasmanians }

Polynesians }
Ancient Egyptians }
Guanches }
Corsicans of Avapezza of the 18th cent. } 0·75
Bohemians of Roumania }
Papuans }
North French of the polished stone age }

TRUE DOLICHOCEPHALI.

Kabyles } 0·74
Arabs }

Nubians of Elephantine }
South French; Neolithic age (cave Homme-Mort) }
France; Palæolithic age } 0·73
Negroes of West Africa }
Bengalese }

Kaffirs } 0·72
Hottentots and Bosjesmans }

Australians }
New Caledonians } 0·71
Esquimaux }

These tables mutually confirm and complete each other in general results. The secondary differences which distinguish them, are doubtless occasioned, on the one hand, by the number of crania employed by the two authors to obtain their means; on the other, from some diversity in the use of these materials. M. Pruner Bey distinguished the sexes, which are united by M. Broca: the latter has placed in one group the Hottentots and Bosjesmans, separated by M. Pruner, etc.

From M. Broca’s table it appears that the mean of all these indices, leaving deformed skulls out of the question, is 0·78. From a numerical point of view this would be that of true mesaticephaly. The mean group ought, it seems to me, to descend equally as it rises, and consequently to absorb at least a part of M. Broca’s sub-dolichocephali. In fact, upon inspecting the two tables, it appears that the indices above 0·74 and below 0·79 comprise the greater number of races belonging to the three fundamental types, and taken from all parts of the world. It seems to me that true mesaticephaly should be comprised within these limits. I do not, however, propose that those which have been adopted should be changed.

These tables give rise to many other observations, of which I shall only point out the principal.

M. Pruner Bey carried his calculations to the third place of decimals; M. Broca to the fourth. I have gone no further than the second, that the eye may be more easily attracted by the series formed by these numbers, so important in the characterization of races. It should be remembered that the greater number are means taken from a certain number of crania. Were there a sufficient number of subjects for each race, and all the indices taken from each arranged in serial order, the distance from one to the other would undoubtedly be no longer 0·01, but would be diminished to 0·001, or even less. The insensible shades observed in passing from one individual to another would here be as remarkable as in the comparison of stature.

There is no need to insist at any length upon the intercrossing, so strikingly betrayed by the two tables. We see that the same index places side by side the most dissimilar races, the South German with the Annamite, the Breton with the Kalmuck, the Belgian with the Tagal, the Parisian with the Malay, the Italian with the Maori, etc., and that by their several indices the white races are scattered throughout almost all the coloured races. I need not return to the consequences which may be drawn from these facts from a monogenistic point of view.

The yellow and black races are not so widely separated as the white; the former are either brachycephalic or mesaticephalic, the latter all dolichocephalic, with the exception of the Aëtas. I have shown that the latter belong to a group of populations extending from the Andaman and Philippine Islands to Torres Strait in Melanesia, penetrating New Guinea, and forming a special _branch_ in the midst of the Melanesian Negro population.

The case appears to be somewhat similar in Africa. This discovery, entirely contrary to the ideas generally maintained till the present time, is due to M. Hamy. This excellent investigator recognized brachycephaly in six skulls taken from the Paris collections, and obtained from Cape Lopez, or the mouths of the Fernand Yaz. Shortly afterwards, M. Duchaillu having brought from the same districts ninety-three skulls, the measurements of which were made public by Englishmen, M. Hamy calculated the indices, and found that twenty-seven of these crania were brachycephalic or mesaticephalic. There is then every indication that the Negro _stock_ in Africa presents a special _branch_ corresponding to the Negritoes. This result is confirmed by Schweinfurth, who places the Niams-Niams and some neighbouring tribes amongst the brachycephali.

We see that the horizontal cephalic index cannot serve as a starting point in the classification of human races, as Retzius imagined it might. We also see, however, that all the value which was attributed to it by its author, is preserved in the characterization of secondary groups.

The extreme means given in M. Pruner Bey’s table were found in two American races, the Esquimaux and the inhabitants of the Pampas of Bogota, etc. Whatever the differences may be which separate these two races, it is evident that neither of them belong either to the black or the white type. They show the greatest affinity to the yellow type.

From one extreme mean to the other there is, according to M. Pruner, a difference of 0·246 between the cephalic indices; according to M. Broca of 0·14552 only. This difference rests chiefly upon the fact of M. Broca rejecting, as deformed, skulls which M. Pruner seems to accept without observation. Again, the individual indices present a much wider variation than would, at first sight, be expected. Huxley mentions a Mongol whose cephalic index rises to 0·977, and a New Zealander, of unmistakable Melanesian origin, in whom it descends to 0·629. The difference is, therefore, 0·348.

The general relations of length and breadth in the cranium of human races is apparent from birth. Nevertheless, from the researches of Gratiolet, it appears that dolichocephaly is due to a relative development of bones, which varies with age. In the infant it is essentially _occipital_, in the child _temporal_, and _frontal_ in the adult man. In the woman the elongation of the cranium depends essentially on the length of the temporal regions; in this respect, then, the woman remains a child all her life.

Starting from these primary results, the same observer has compared dolichocephalic Whites with African and Melanesian Negroes. He found that the frontal dolichocephaly of the former was replaced in the two black races by an occipital dolichocephaly. M. Broca has established the same fact in comparing Basques with Parisians. Thus the distinction proposed by M. Gratiolet furnishes a secondary character, which may be of use in certain cases, but which falls very short of the importance with which some have attempted to invest it. They would consider occipital dolichocephaly as a character which widely separates the Negro from the White; the observations of M. Broca show that this is not at all the case, and from the observations of M. Gratiolet it appears that we have here only the persistence of an anterior condition common to both. The Negro and the Basque preserve throughout life the cephalic character of the infant Parisian, thus forming one of the many examples of that cessation of evolution which, as we see more distinctly every day, plays a considerable part in the characterization of human races.

The study of the horizontal cephalic index might lead to many other remarks. I shall only recall the results obtained by M. Diétrici. It appears from his calculations that, the total population of the globe given at 1288 millions, there are 1026 millions of dolichocephali, and only 262 millions of brachycephali. But the Berlin savant places in the first category the Chinese, who are mesaticephali, and must alone be reckoned at 421 millions. All these facts considered, it appears to me, from the tables of MM. Pruner Bey and Broca, and other data, received up to the present time, that the mesaticephali are much more numerous than either the brachycephali or dolichocephali. If mesaticephaly is taken in the sense pointed out above, the latter in their turn predominate over the brachycephali, owing chiefly to African black populations, which we are daily learning to estimate as much more dense than they were formerly thought to be.

Retzius only compared the antero-posterior and transverse maximum diameters. Later investigators have sought the relation between the latter and the height of the cranium. The _vertical cephalic index_ has thus been obtained, the importance of which is at once evident. It plays an equally important part in the table of M. Pruner Bey, and gives rise to considerations analogous to those just discussed. I cannot, however, enter into all these details without exceeding the limits of this book. From the same motive I shall not mention the other measurements of the cranium, maximum and minimum _frontal diameters_, _total circumference_, _antero-posterior arc_, and others.

The composition of the cranium can only vary within very narrow limits. Nevertheless, in Negroes, in ancient Egyptians, etc., the squamous portion of the temporal bone is sometimes united to the frontal without the partial interposition of the wings of the sphenoid. This is a remarkable fact, being in direct contradiction to the _principles of connections_, so justly regarded by Etienne Geoffroy as one of the most essential principles of comparative anatomy.

In the preceding case, the composition of the cranium is altered by the suppression of a normal suture. This may also be caused by the appearance of an abnormal suture, by which two distinct bones are formed from a single one. Such is the case when the occipital bone seems to divide, so as to leave its upper portion free. We then have what has been called the _epactal bone_, or _bone of the Incas_, because Rivers and Tschudy imagined this conformation to be a character peculiar to the race. M. Jacquart, however, showed that it was merely the result of a cessation in the evolution of the occipital bone, of which examples are found in the most different human races. It is to a similar phenomenon that the persistence of the medio-frontal suture is due. This, again, is doubtless universal, but much more frequent in the Aryan white race than in coloured races, and especially in the Negroes.

These facts are connected, moreover, with a group of observations and ideas which Gratiolet has brought forward on several occasions. According to this ingenious observer, the anterior sutures are the first to unite in inferior races, while in superior races the obliteration commences with the posterior sutures. Again, the sutures, as a whole, have a tendency to disappear rapidly in savage races, while the isolation of the bones of the cranium is persistent in civilized races, and particularly in the European White. This disposition allows a continuance of the development of the brain, although it gradually becomes slower. Gratiolet thus explains the continuance of the intellectual power, so remarkable in men who have constantly exercised their intelligence. The statistic researches of Dr. Pomerol, while correcting all that is absolute in this theory, seems to confirm it in some respects.

Since I am unable to review all the cranial characters, I shall pass by those drawn from the prominence of different bones, the occipital indices of Broca, the cephalo-spinal of Mantegazza, etc. I shall only say a few words upon the position of the foramen magnum, and the sphenoïdal angle of Welker, but I shall dwell more at length upon the _capacity_ of the cranium.

D’Aubenton, in a special work, shows that the foramen magnum is always placed further back in animals than in man. Sœmmering remarked that it seemed more so in the Negro than in the White; and this opinion, which was apparently confirmed by some measurements, was at once accepted by a number of anthropologists, and regarded by them as a _simian character_, but this result was attained by considering the position of the aperture relatively to the entire length of the skull, including the face. Now it is at once evident that the forward development of the latter, by reason of prognathism, would increase the apparent retreat of the former.

The researches of M. Broca upon _cranial projections_ enable us to state this problem correctly, and to give the solution of it. M. Broca compared 60 Europeans with 35 Negroes. Representing the _total projection_ by 1000, he found that in the former the _anterior projection_ was 475, and in the latter 498. The anterior border of the foramen magnum is then further removed from the alveolar border in the Negro than in the White, the difference being 23. But this projection includes, with the _anterior cranial projection_, the _facial projection_, which is 65 in the European and 138 in the Negro. If this is deducted from the former, we find that the White stands first in _cranial projection alone_, and that the difference is 50.

We learn from these calculations that, relatively to the cranium to which it belongs, the foramen magnum is placed more forward in the Negro than in the White, which is by no means the case in apes. These same calculations demonstrate the real difference which here distinguishes the two, that, namely, of the forward prolongation of the face.

In drawing comparisons between men and apes, the _sphenoïdal angle_ discovered by M. Virchow, studied by M. Welker, and which, thanks to M. Broca, may be measured without making a section of the skull, presents special interest. It presents an inverse evolution in man, and the Quadrumana during growth. This may be seen from the annexed calculations borrowed from M. Welker:—

MAN.

8 Infants 141°
10 Children from 10 to 15 years 137°
30 Adult Germans 134°
----
Difference -7°

APES.

Sajou, at birth 140°
” adult 174°
----
Difference +34°

Orang., young 155°
” adult 172°
” old 174°
----
Difference +19°

I have already insisted that facts of this nature are irreconcilable with those theories which attribute a more or less pithecoid ancestor to man.

In discussing the cranial cavity, our special object is to supply the deficiency of information upon the volume and weight of the brain. Now, from this point of view, we may easily fall into error. The bony cabinet and its contents are developed, to a certain extent at least, independently. This is very clearly demonstrated by a fact which was observed by Gratiolet, and is too frequently forgotten. The subject is an infant in whom the cranium presented the normal conformation. The brain was, nevertheless, almost entirely wanting. In well-formed men the sinuses and coverings of the brain may very easily be more or less developed according to the individual or race, and influence the relative dimensions of the brain.

Moreover, the exact measurement of the capacity of the cranium is attended by difficulties which have not yet been entirely surmounted. In spite of the improvements introduced by M. Broca in his method of measuring with shot, consecutive measurements of the same cranium by the same observer will vary considerably in the result.

Again, there are peculiarities to be taken into consideration, the importance of which has long been neglected. We have known for several years that the stature has an influence upon the weight of the brain. It cannot be without influence upon the cavity by which the latter is enclosed. M. Broca has shown that sex is of itself a cause of variation. In the woman the mean cranial capacity is always less than in the man, and the difference varies between different races.

Nevertheless, in examining a sufficient number of skulls, the causes of error may counterbalance each other, and the means may be accepted as giving results sufficiently near the truth. The results obtained by the same observer are especially favourable for comparison, and from them certain results may be obtained. There is no reason, therefore, why the cranial capacity should not be considered as a character well worthy of study. But its importance must not be exaggerated.

M. Broca arrived at the following result, in considering the distinction of extreme races. The cranial capacity of the Australian being represented by 100, that of the African Negro is 111·60, and that of fair European races 124·8.

I borrow from my eminent colleague the following table, published by M. Topinard in his _Anthropologie_. This table gives the mean cranial capacity, in cubic centimetres, for a certain number of races in both sexes. I have merely substituted the serial order in the men for the almost geographical division of the author, and calculated the difference between the sexes.

+-----------------------------------+------+---------+-------------+
| RACES. | MEN. | WOMEN. | DIFFERENCE. |
+-----------------------------------+------+---------+-------------+
| Cavern of Homme-Mort. Neolithic | 1616 | 1507 | 109 |
| Gallo-Bretons | 1599 | 1426 | 173 |
| Auvergnats | 1598 | 1445 | 153 |
| Spanish Basques | 1574 | 1356 | 218 |
| Bas-Bretons | 1564 | 1366 | 198 |
| Contemporary Parisians | 1558 | 1337 | 221 |
| Guanches | 1557 | 1353 | 204 |
| Corsicans | 1552 | 1367 | 185 |
| Esquimaux | 1539 | 1428 | 111 |
| Chinese | 1518 | 1383 | 135 |
| Merovingians | 1504 | 1361 | 143 |
| New Caledonians | 1460 | 1330 | 130 |
| Negroes of West Africa | 1430 | 1281 | 179 |
| Tasmanians | 1452 | 1201 | 251 |
| Australians | 1347 | 1181 | 156 |
| Nubians | 1329 | 1298 | 31 |
+-----------------------------------+------+---------+-------------+

We here observe facts of intercrossing similar to those which I have so often pointed out. The Merovingians, a white race of the first order, are placed between the yellow Chinese and the New Caledonians, Melanesian Negroes.

But the chief value of this table is to show into what serious errors an estimation of the intellectual development of a race from its cranial capacity would lead us. By such an estimation, the troglodytes of the cavern of L’Homme-Mort would be superior to all races enumerated in the table, including contemporary Parisians, and the Chinese would come after the Esquimaux. The French populations occupy, it is true, the upper portion of the table, and the several Negro races are at the bottom. But here, again, when we find the Nubians following closely upon the Australians, we must confess that there can be no real relation between the dimensions of the cranial capacity and social development. We meet, moreover, with similar questions when we turn our attention to the brain.

The following table, which I borrow from Morton, is as instructive as the preceding. It includes a greater number of races. Moreover, the American _savant_ has not only given the means, but also the maxima and minima as established by his researches. His measurements are given in cubic inches. As they are only required for comparison with those of other observers, I have not reduced them to cubic centimetres. I have again confined myself to arranging the means in a descending series, and to calculating the differences between the maxima and minima.

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| RACES. | MEAN. | MAX. | MIN. | DIFF. |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| English | 96 | 105 | 91 | 14 |
| | | | | |
| Germans } | 90 { | 114 | 70 | 44 |
| Anglo-Americans } | { | 97 | 82 | 15 |
| | | | | |
| Arabs | 89 | 98 | 84 | 14 |
| | | | | |
| Greco-Egyptians of the Catacombs | 88 } | | 74 | 23 |
| Irish | 87 } | 97 | 78 | 19 |
| Malays | 86 } | | 68 | 29 |
| | | | | |
| Persians } | } | | | |
| Armenians } | } | 94 | 75 | 19 |
| Circassians } | } | | | |
| Iroquois } | 84 } | | | |
| Lenapes } | } | 104 | 70 | 34 |
| Cherokees } | } | | | |
| Shoshones } | } | | | |
| | | | | |
| African Negroes } | 83 { | 99 | 65 | 34 |
| Polynesians } | { | 84 | 82 | 2 |
| | | | | |
| Chinese } | 82 { | 91 | 70 | 21 |
| Creole Negroes of North America } | { | 89 | 73 | 16 |
| | | | | |
| Hindoos } | { | 91 | 77 | 14 |
| Ancient Egyptians of the Catacombs} | 80 { | 96 | 68 | 28 |
| Fellahs } | { | 96 | 66 | 30 |
| | | | | |
| Mexicans | 79 | 92 | 67 | 25 |
| | | | | |
| Peruvians } | { | 101 | 58 | 47 |
| Australians } | 75 { | 83 | 68 | 15 |
| Hottentots } | { | 83 | 63 | 20 |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

This table, borrowed from one of the most eminent supporters of polygenism, should, I think, excite reflections in all who pay any attention to facts.

We find the Chinese placed, by their mean cranial capacity, below the Polynesians, the African Negroes, and the savage tribes of North America. Is this really the position which their civilization assigns to them?

In Morton’s table the Creole Negroes of America fall below the African Negroes by the lesser development of the same cavity. Meigs has confirmed this curious fact in several ways, and has even made the difference still wider; 80·8 for the former and 83·7 for the latter. And yet it is universally acknowledged that Negroes born in America are intellectually superior to their African brothers. Even Nott allows that it is so. With them, therefore, the intelligence increases, while the cranial capacity diminishes.

This fact is the more singular since the observations of M. Broca upon Parisian skulls of the thirteenth to the nineteenth century show that the Cranial capacity increases with general intellectual progress. The measurements taken by the same observer upon individuals belonging to the educated and illiterate classes lead to the same conclusion.

Still, however, we cannot disregard the calculations of Morton and Meigs; and this _experience_, bearing upon numerous populations of the same race, seems to establish beyond a doubt the fact, which already clearly results from the comparison of different races, namely, that the development of the intellectual faculties of man is, to a great extent, independent of the capacity of the cranium and the volume of the brain.

I must here confine myself to the statement that the diminution of the cranium is, in North America, one of the _characters of the Creole Negro race_, derived from the _African Negro race_.

The intercrossing of races is again demonstrated in this table by the means. The Hindoos and ancient Egyptians are separated from the other White races of the Negroes, Chinese, Polynesians, and Red-Skins.

But the maxima and minima show still more clearly how far this confusion would be carried, if individuals were compared. Hottentots and Australians, by their maxima of 83, would stand before Germans and Anglo-Americans, whose minimum is not so high. With much greater reason would they be placed in the midst of all the other races, which, by their means, are placed above them. This is not all. Between the highest and the lowest mean, between the English and Hottentots, or Australians, the difference in cranial capacity is only twenty-one cubic inches. The difference between the maximum and minimum of the Chinese is exactly the same. And it is much greater in nine other races, being more than double in the Germans and Peruvians.

Do we meet with facts like those resulting from the measurements of Morton in the _species_ of a single _genera_ of plants and animals? Certainly not; and this table is of itself sufficient to prove that the human groups are _races_, which have little uniformity owing to the absence of selection, and in no sense _species_.

III. _Characters drawn from the face alone._—Similar conclusions to those furnished by the examination of the cranium are suggested by that of the entire face. It may be either broad or long; and in order to distinguish these two forms by special epithets, we may employ the terms _euryopse_, _dolichopse_ (οψις, _theatrical mask_).

Since the face is much more irregular in form than the cranium, it gives rise to a far greater number of observations. Each one of its features would deserve our attention, were we writing a detailed work, and the more so, as such close study as this can only boast an existence of a few years. Failing space, I shall confine myself to pointing out the nature of the characters, and commenting upon some of the principal results.

In the living subject the length of the face is estimated from the commencement of the hair to the extremity of the chin. But measurements of this kind are difficult to procure when exotic races are in question. Skulls, therefore, have been examined. In the latter, the inferior maxillary bone is very often wanting, and even the teeth have, in too many cases, fallen out. The inferior limit of the length of the face could therefore be carried no further than the alveolar border of the superior maxillary bone. The _point sus-nasal_ of M. Broca serves as the superior limit. The interval comprised within these limits is always less than the _breadth_ measured across the zygomatic arches. In multiplying by 100 the length of the face and dividing it by the breadth, M. Broca has obtained the _facial index_. The following are some examples which I borrow from him with M. Topinard:

Esquimaux 73·4
Negroes 68·6
Gallo-Bretons 68·5
Auvergnats 67·9
New Caledonians 66·2
Parisians 65·9
Australians 65·6
Tasmanians 62·6

In spite of the small number of these examples, they might lead to remarks similar to those which I have already brought forward on several occasions, and which I believe it to be unnecessary to repeat.

The nose is one of the most striking features of the human face. Its general form and dimensions furnish some of the most special external characters in the distinction of races. But the morphological variations of this organ, presenting considerable difficulties, had long been neglected. M. Topinard filled this gap, and showed that it is possible, even upon casts, to take measurements suitable for indices. Nevertheless, it is the skull that, up to the present time, has contributed the clearest indications. The breadth of the nose taken at the opening of the nasal fossæ and multiplied by 100, compared with the length from the spine to the naso-frontal articulation, has furnished M. Broca with the terms of the relation expressed by his _nasal index_, the study of which has led him to important results.

Measurements, taken upon more than 1,200 skulls of all races, have enabled M. Broca to give 50·00 as the mean nasal index. In the entire number of races this index varies from 42·33 (Esquimaux) to 58·38 (Houzouanas). We see that the variation is only 16·05. The individual differences are much wider, extending from 72·22 (Houzouanas) to 35·71 (Roumanians), thus giving a maximum variation of 36·51.

The difference between the maximum and minimum in the same race is also very striking. When it exceeds ten, M. Broca seems to attribute it almost exclusively to crossing. He has made an ingenious application of this idea in the history of the crossing of the Franks with the races who preceded them in France. But we can scarcely allow that this is always the case when we see the difference rising to 21·98 in the Negroes of West Africa, and to 25·05 in the Hottentots and Bosjesmans. It seems to me that this is only the repetition of a fact which we have already proved with regard to the capacity of crania.

M. Broca has made use of his nasal index to divide all human races into three groups from this point of view. In races of a mean nasal index, or _Mesorhinian_, it only varies from 48 to 53. Below these are ranged races with a long narrow nose, or _Leptorhinian_; and above, those with a broad and more or less flat nose, _Platyrhinian_.

The groups thus obtained are fairly homogeneous. The Leptorhinian would comprise only Whites, if the Esquimaux had not most unexpectedly stepped in. The Platyrhinian group is composed exclusively of Negroes, and includes all the races of this type studied by M. Broca, with the exception of the Papuans, who are perhaps a mixed race. The Mesorhinians embrace all the Yellow races, as well as the Polynesians, all the Americans and the Papuans, which I have just mentioned. We also find in this group Allophylian Whites, the Esthonians, and the Finns, who are thus separated from the Aryans and Semites.

In short, if we take means alone into consideration, the nasal index, taken as a basis in the division of races, breaks a much smaller number of natural relations than the characters which we have as yet discussed. Apart from the exceptions which I have just alluded to, intercrossing here only appears between races belonging to the same type. But as soon as we take individual variations into account, the mixture, so often observed, reappears.

M. Broca has studied the nasal index not only in the adult, but also when in a state of evolution. He found that in an embryo of three months this index was 76·80; in a perfect fœtus, 62·18; in a child of six years, 50·20; in modern Parisians, 46·81. Thus the index constantly diminishes as the body approaches its definite form. Our author concludes from this fact that the variations observed in the same race may often be referred to an arrest of development, or rather an arrest of evolution, and he seems disposed to attach the platyrhinism of Negroes to the same cause. He thus adopts the idea of Serres upon the general character of the Negro, which ideas we shall examine presently. This I regard as a very correct explanation of the origin of one of the distinctive features which most clearly distinguishes the black race. It is not, however, to the nasal index alone that this fact is applicable, as I have already proved.

The _orbital index_, also studied by M. Broca, is obtained by multiplying the vertical diameter of the orbit by 100, and dividing the product by the horizontal diameter. Considered from this point of view, races are divided into three groups, namely, the _megasemes_, whose mean index rises to 89 and higher; the _mesosemes_, whose index varies from 83 to 89 only; and the _microsemes_, whose index fall below 83.

The highest mean index stated by M. Broca, is found in the Aymaras, in whom it rises to 98·8. But we know that the cranium is artificially deformed by this people, and the practice may in some measure influence the form of the orbit. The maximum in normal skulls was observed in the Polynesians of Hawaï, where it was 95·40. The minimum of 77·01 is presented by the Guanches of Teneriffe.

The mean maximum variation is then 18·30.

But here, as in all other cases, individual variations are much more considerable. Without even taking the Aymaras into consideration, whose index sometimes exceeds 109, M. Broca found 108·33 in a Chinese, 105 in a Chinese and an Indian Red-Skin, 100 in two women of the Marquesas Islands, a Peruvian woman, a Malay, a Mexican, an Indo-Chinese, a woman of ancient Egypt, of Auvergne, and Paris. It is unnecessary to insist upon the meaning of these similarities.

The smallest orbital index known is that of the old man of Cro-Magnon, which we have seen to be 61·36. Above the latter, and at small distances from each other, may be ranged a Tasmanian, a Merovingian, the Mentone man (of the same race as that of Cro-Magnon), a Guanche of Teneriffe, a New Caledonian, an Australian, a Nubian, a Kaffir, a Spanish Basque, an Auvergnat, and lastly, the woman of Cro-Magnon, whose index is 71·25.

The maximum individual variation is then 46·87.

Upon examining the table of M. Broca, we find that the white races are represented in the three groups. The Dutch of Zaandam figure among the megasemes between the aborigines of Mexico and those of North-west America. The Gallo-Bretons are placed in the same group, between the Chilians and the Indo-Chinese. The Whites form the great majority in the group of mesosemes, and are much the most numerous in that of the microsemes. One of their races indeed, the natives of Teneriffe, terminates the series, immediately preceded by the Tasmanians and Australians.

Thus, as far as the white race is concerned, the mean orbital index proclaims an intercrossing comparable with all that we have hitherto observed. The case is different with the two other fundamental types. They are distinctly separated by this character. All the yellow races are megasemes, for in my opinion the Lapps, considered by M. Broca to belong to them, are in reality allophylian Whites. All the negro races are mesosemes or microsemes. There is a difference of 4·03 between the aborigines of Brazil representing the last megasemes which have not been deformed, and the Papuans of Toud Island, who have, of all Blacks, the highest orbital index.

The usual intercrossing would undoubtedly reappear if we took individual variations into consideration. The difference 9·89 which separates the man of Cro-Magnon from the woman of the same race is sufficient proof.

M. Broca has studied the influence of sex and age upon the orbital index. I cannot follow him into these details, however interesting they may be. I will only remark, that, as in the case of the nasal index, it diminishes with the progress of evolution, and remains in all races greater in the woman than in the man. The latter preserves, then, throughout life, a certain infantile character.

This observation applies equally to races distinguished for the size of their orbital index. The yellow races, including the Chinese, present therefore, if compared with white races, _an arrest of evolution_. Yet the Chinese are far superior to all the microseme or mesoseme black races, and particularly the Australians and Tasmanians, who are only followed by the inhabitants of Teneriffe in the lowest places of the table. If we take the white as the normal type, we must regard these two populations as presenting an _excess of evolution_; but this excess is still more marked in the Guanches of Teneriffe, who, in their mode of life, are considerably superior to the Tasmanians and Australians.

A general conclusion follows from these facts, namely: that the characters resulting from an _arrest_ or _excess_ of evolution, are not of themselves a sign of superiority or inferiority.

M. Broca has, with great propriety, compared the orbital index of apes with that of man. As might easily have been foreseen, the laws of development are the same in the highest groups of apes as in man. The influence of sex and age are as noticeable in the gorilla, the orang, and in the chimpanzee as in our own races. It seems to be less striking in the lower apes.

The orbital index groups apes, like man, into megasemes, mesosemes and microsemes. But this character connects the anthropomorphous apes with the lowest types, with the cebidæ, and even the lemuridæ, which we now, from their embryogeny, connect with the ruminants or edentata. The genera of simiadæ are divided into three groups. M. Broca draws from these facts the very first conclusion that no value, as characterising gradations, can be attributed to the orbital index.

It is well known that in the Negro the entire face, and especially the lower portion, projects forward. This trait has been termed _prognathism_. In the living subject it is exaggerated by the thickness of the lips. But it is also apparent in the skull, and constitutes one of its most striking characters. M. Topinard has studied it in a special manner, and by a method of his own. He has with justice separated _facial prognathism_, which embraces the entire face, from the various _maxillary_ and _dental prognathisms_, which distinctions I proposed some time ago. The index is here furnished by the relation existing between the height, and the horizontal projection of the region under consideration. But M. Topinard has recently replaced this index by the angle formed by the _profile lines_ with the horizontal plane. This is a happy modification, as it presents a more precise idea to the mind.

The most important of the several prognathisms is that arising from the portion of the maxillary bone situated below the nose, and comprising the alveoli of the incisors and canines. This is the _sub-nasal-alveolar prognathism_, or the _superior maxillary prognathism_. It is this trait of the Negro which is opposed to the _orthognathism_ of the White. This character suggests remarks similar to those which I have already made so often. It is the evident result of the following summary, which I borrow almost verbatim from M. Topinard’s work.

All races and all individuals are more or less prognathous. As a rule, in European races it is only slight; it is much more marked in the Yellow and Polynesian races, and more strongly marked still in Negro races. Let us remark, however, that even mean indices place the Tasmanians (76°·28) above the Finns and Esthonians (75°·53), and very near the Merovingians (75°·54).

The minimum prognathism, or maximum orthognathism, is found in the Guanches (81°·34), and the opposite extreme in the Namaquois and Bosjesmans (59°·88). The means establish limits between the various sub-divisions of the great fundamental races. Individual variations, however, in this case, as in others, obliterate these distinctions. In all races there are exceptions, Negroes in whom prognathism is no more marked than in Whites, and Whites in whom it is very pronounced. M. Topinard regards these exceptional cases as examples of crossing, atavism, or as pathological phenomena. There is certainly some truth in this view. I have long referred the prognathism, sometimes so curiously marked in certain Parisian women, to atavism. But we must also take into consideration these _oscillations of characters_, which we everywhere meet with in races not subject to selection with any special aim.

In any case we cannot consider cessation of development as explaining the existence of a most striking prognathism in certain individuals of incontestably pure white race. In fact, far from diminishing with age, like the preceding characters, it rather increases. Even in the European, the child is manifestly more orthognathous than the adult. With regard to Negroes, Pruner Bey observed some time ago, and I have myself proved, that the child presents scarcely any trace of that feature, so characteristic in the parents. It is not till the period of puberty that it appears, and is rapidly developed. The forward projection of the maxillary bone is, therefore, in both races a fact of normal evolution, merely more marked in the one than in the other. Far from being the result of a _cessation_, prognathism betrays an _excess_ of development.

The absolute theory of Serres, which would treat the Negro merely as a White, subjected to a cessation of general development, is then here at fault. The truth is, that in the black race, organic evolution is less advanced than the general type of white race in some respects, and more so in others. This is a fact upon which I have long insisted in my lectures at the Museum, and which is confirmed, as we now see, by the more exact work of later years.

We see, also, that, in order to account for the differences separating the Negro from the White, it is by no means necessary to have recourse to phenomena of atavism as exhibited by animals. Simple oscillations, above or below the mean in the normal evolution of man, are sufficient to explain it. I feel myself, therefore, still more strongly justified in opposing the _human evolution theory_ to the _simian evolution theory_.

The zygomatic arches, the malar bone, the superior and inferior maxillary bones also furnish the anthropologist with several more or less essential characters which sometimes acquire, in reference to a given race, a value superior to that which they have elsewhere. Such is the slight elevation of the _palatine vault_ in the Lapps. But I cannot here enter into these details, and refer the reader to special books and memoirs.

IV. _Characters drawn from the skull considered as a whole._ When, instead of studying the face or cranium alone, we consider them in their reciprocal relations, we see new traits appearing, furnishing a number of characters, some of which are of real importance.

Let us, in the first place, remark that there may be either _harmony_ or _dysharmony_ between these two great regions. The skull is harmonic in the Negro, whose cranium and face are equally long, and in the Mongol, who unites the two contrary characters; it is dysharmonic, as we have seen, in the old man of Cro-Magnon, and in the man of La Truchère, but for contrary reasons.

Cuvier endeavoured to find the relation of the skull and the face by making an antero-posterior section of the skull, and directly measuring the surfaces of the section. He found that in the White the face represented about 0·25 of the skull, 0·30 in the Yellow, and 0·40 in the Black. These results entirely accord with those furnished by the study of prognathism.

This relative difference of the development of the face led Camper to the conception of his celebrated facial angle. Struck by seeing painters represent Negroes as Whites painted black, he studied the anatomical characters of the skull, and gave, as the proper distinction, the angle formed by two lines; the one passing from the auditory canal to the root of the nose, the other tangential to the forehead and to the nasal bone, both being represented upon a vertical projection of the model. Camper made use of his method to distinguish between the products of Greek and Roman art. He thus represented a decreasing scale from the works of art in statuary to non-adult apes. I reproduce it, not because of its real value, but on account of the importance which has been attributed to it. The following are the variations of the facial angle, according to Camper:

Greek statues 100°
Roman statues 95°
White race 80°
Yellow race 75°
Black race 70°
Young apes (superior type) 65°

Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Cuvier, M. Jules Cloquet and Jacquard have adopted different methods in determining the facial angle. Morton, Jacquard, and M. Broca have invented instruments for measuring it directly. M. Topinard, after having examined the several methods, gives, with justice, his opinion in favour of that of Cloquet, which places the upper extremity of the angle at the alveolar border. M. Jacquard had chosen the nasal spine, remarking at the same time that the difference between the two angles might be of service in the calculation of prognathism.

Camper, or rather those who have followed him, wished to consider the size of the facial angle as a sign of superior intellectual power. His _graduated scale_ has evidently given rise to this false idea. Pathological facts should have sufficed to show how great was the error. The work of Jacquard has, moreover, established this fact beyond a doubt. This author has proved a difference of more than 16° in the educated White of Paris, that is to say, 6° more than the distance established by Camper as separating the Negro from the White. Jacquard, again, has proved in the French race the existence of an angle of 90°, an angle which Camper believed to belong only to the ideal representations of the human form. Now this remarkable angular superiority was by no means accompanied by an exceptional intelligence.

If we pass from the psychological to the anatomical meaning I shall have similar remarks to make. There has been much discussion as to the position of the upper extremity of the facial line, which, with the horizontal line, forms the angle of Camper. It has been thought desirable to avoid the frontal sinuses, and to seek in the facial angle indications relative to the dimensions of the encephalon, and _not those of any particular bone_. I think, on the contrary, that we must be content with the latter, and not go further. It is evident that the dimensions of the encephalon are independent of the position of the frontal point, and that it may be more or less extended to the right, left, or behind this point without the facial angle being affected in any manner whatever.

The exact determination of the _means_ of the facial angle will still, however, be valuable, like all those which it is possible to calculate upon the human body, provided there is a sufficient distance between these means. But M. Topinard has shown that this difference is not more than three degrees. Without altogether renouncing the ideas of Camper, we see that science now has characters preferable to those which he discovered.

A more important angle is the _anterior parietal angle_, formed on both sides of the skull by two lines tangential to the most prominent point of the zygomatic arch, and to the fronto-parietal suture. By taking the most prominent point of the parietal eminences as the second extremity, we obtain the _posterior parietal angle_. Prichard applied the term _pyramidal skulls_ to those in which these lines converged. I have endeavoured to measure the angle directly with an instrument of my own invention, and my first researches have led me to results which I believe to be interesting. The angle is sometimes wide, sometimes narrow, and may be altogether wanting when the two tangents are parallel. It is, then, sometimes positive, sometimes negative. The latter is the case in the fœtus and infants of all races. The negative angle is also met with in adults. This trait appears to have been very striking in Cuvier, judging from a fine portrait of the great naturalist when still young. I have found it to be -18° and -22° in two living persons, both remarkable for their intelligence. The positive maximum which I observed upon an Esquimaux cranium was +14°. I have employed this character in my course of lectures to complete the characterization of a great number of races, but have never published any details.

M. Topinard has just filled this gap in a work which confirms, and at the same time, completes all my first results. His researches, bearing solely upon skulls, have given him as limits of individual variations, 5° and +30°; as limits of the means, +2°·5 and +20°·3. He found in the New Caledonians the most pyramidal heads. Finally, he has seen in children from the age of four months to sixteen years, the angle decreasing from -24° to 0° and rise to 7°.

Thus the negative parietal angle in the adult is nothing more than a persistent fœtal or infantile character. It is evidently the result of a _cessation of development_, or rather, a _cessation of evolution_. Now, we have just seen that this character may exist in individuals endowed with an intelligence above the average, and even in men of genius. A _cessation of evolution_, the persistent trace of a fœtal or infantile condition, is not, therefore, necessarily a _character of inferiority_ either in individuals or races.