SPANISH ANTHROPOLOGY 



107 



Crania. 



On the whole, the correspondences are good, even 

 where the numbers are too small for anything like cer- 

 tainty ; but there are two very discrepant items on which 

 it may be as well to dwell for a moment. 



Not only is the number of crania from Turdetania 

 (Andalusia) insufficient ; but those tabulated come mostly 

 from the eastern and more dolichokephalic provinces. 



The figures for Keltiberia, and especially those for 

 Cuenca, which is one of the provinces of that region as 

 limited by Aranzadi and Hoyos-Sainz, remain inexplicable 

 to me. The numbers are not apparently insufficient, and a 

 smaller series from Cuenca measured by Oloriz accord well 

 enough with the measurements taken by him from the 

 living population. I can only suggest that Cuenca is far 

 less homogeneous in respect to kephalic index, according to 

 Oloriz's data, than most of the provinces, as it is also in its 

 hydrography ; the northern and eastern more mountainous 

 districts on the Guadiola and Cabriel rivers running below 

 77 ; while the central and western tablelands exceed 79, the 

 former assimilated to the neighbouring Valencia, the latter 

 to the Oretanian region. 



If we now take Oloriz's map, checking and supple- 

 menting it by that of Aranzadi and Hoyos-Sainz where 

 available, we shall find that geographically Spain will fall 

 into four, or perhaps I should say five, pretty distinct and 



