512 HEIGHT AND WEIGHT IN RELATION TO BUILD 



length of foot from 15.3 per cent of the stature at birth to 16.4 per cent at 9 years, 

 little change from here to puberty, and then a decline to 15.7 per cent at 20 years of 

 age. Quetelet (1870) gives the relative length of the foot at birth in each sex as 15 

 per cent of the stature. In the adult he gives the length of the male foot as 16 per 

 cent, the female foot 15 per cent. In both sexes he shows the foot longest at about 

 the period of puberty. This is likewise shown by the data of W. S. Hall (1896) on 

 American boys. Hall gives a relative length of the foot that is about 0.5 per cent 

 of the stature less than Quetelet's for corresponding stature, but Hall's measure- 

 ments appear to have been taken with the knee flexed and the foot on a platform 

 relieved of the body-weight. The length of foot of American college students is 

 likewise usually taken in this way (Seaver, 1909). The length of the foot relieved 

 of the body-weight is usually shorter than when bearing body-weight. The data 

 of Bertillon (1889) on length of foot in relation to stature in men show that short 

 men have relatively longer feet than tall men. At a stature of 57 inches the length 

 is 16.1 per cent of the stature, at 73 inches it is 15.5 per cent. The female foot is 

 relatively shorter than the male foot. The difference begins in childhood and in the 

 adult amounts to about 0.5 to 1 per cent of the stature. 



Length of upper extremity. This is plotted for males in chart I between the lines 

 "height to acromion" and "height to tip of middle finger." The data for the 

 curves are given in table K. The total length increases from 41.5 per cent of the 

 stature at birth to 45 per cent in the adult. The female extremity is about 1 .0 per cent 

 of the stature shorter than the male. Its length is not plotted in chart I. Data on 

 the growth of the upper extremity are given by Weissenberg (1911), Quetelet 

 (table E), Godin (1910), Schwerz (1910), Ernst (1906), Landsberger (1888), and 

 others. The differences in relative length at a given stature found by these various 

 investigators are slight and will not be discussed here. The length given for the 

 upper extremities by Schwerz (1910) is 0.5 to 1 per cent of the stature less than that 

 shown in my curve. The difference comes chiefly in forearm and hands. The 

 data of the other investigators come closer to my curve. Weissenberg (1911) states 

 that the upper extremity reaches its full length in females at 18 years of age, in 

 males at 25 years of age. Pfitzner (1899) reports growth continuing until old age. 



Length of arm. For level of acromion to level of elbow-joint, see chart I. The 

 length of the arm given by Quetelet (1870) and by Landsberger (1888) is about 1 

 per cent greater than that shown in my curve. This is probably due to differences 

 in the technique of measurement used. Hall (1896), who measured to the olecranon, 

 gives still higher figures for the relative length of the arm. The data of Schwerz 

 (1910) correspond closely to my curve, but cover a period merely from the sixth to 

 the twentieth year. Sexual differences in relative length of the arm are not apparent 

 in the data of Schwerz. Quetelet makes the female arm slightly shorter than that 

 of the male. Hitchcock (1900) shows that the right arm averages uniformly longer 

 than the left. According to Godin (1910), the arm changes little in relative length 

 from 13.5 to 17.5 years of age, but at 23.5 years of age is 0.7 per cent of the 

 stature greater than that at 13.5 years of age. 



