NATUEAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 45 



with ours of 110-15 cubic inches, for, no doubt, both were derived from the 

 skulls of men. The largest internal capacity in his whole table, 114 cubic 

 inches, was found in the skull of a Dutchman, who was born at Utrecht and 

 died in Java. In fact, it is the largest cranium in the grand Mortoniau collec- 

 tion. A skull of an ancient Briton found in Green Lowe, in Derbyshire, which 

 has probably belonged to a Ooritanian, has a capacity of 110-15 cubic inches, 

 or within 4 cubic inches of the same size. The largest of Morton's English 

 skulls had an internal capacity of lOG cubic inches, or 5-15 cubic inches less 

 than the Green Lowe Barrow cranium. And the largest of Morton's Anglo- 

 American skulls was no less than 13 cubic inches Ic-ss than this from the Green 

 Lowe Barrow in internal capacity. From this small and imperfect amount of 

 evidence we appear to be justified in concluding that the crania of the Ancient 

 Britons were by no means deficient in internal or cerebral capacity. Much 

 more numerous observations arc, however, required before any data can be de- 

 duced on this subject, of a nature as satisfactory as the evidence will admit. 



It may not be impertinent to mention here, parenthetically, that the skull of 

 largest internal capacity we have met with, is au ancient Iri>sh calvarium, found 

 in 1855 at a depth of 10 feet in Suffolk street in Dublin; of course the term 

 ancient in this place must be taken conditionally, as applying probably to 

 medieval and not to pnmeval times. The internal capacity of this calvarium is 

 notless than 123-5 cubic inches, or very nearly 10 cubic inches more than that 

 of the Dutchman of noble birth in the i\[ortonian Collection. 



An assertion is frequently made by the advocates of the progressive develop- 

 ment and improvement of all races, which it may not be improper to allude to 

 here. They maintain that the influence of what is denominated civilization is 

 able to develope the brain of any race materially in the course of ages, and con- 

 sequently its osseous case. This doctrine of development is distinct from that 

 which affirms that different races of men are distinguished by crania of different 

 capacities ; on the contrary, it supposes that all races may, by a process of 

 civilization and development attain to a large capacity of the skull and corres- 

 ponding great brain. As far as the observations of ancient British. crania we 

 have previously mentioned, they do not give any countenance to this theory of 

 development. And, we may add, that our further observations, although neither 

 so numerous nor so extensive as they ought to be, and as we hope to make them, 

 on ancient Roman and on Anglo-Saxon skulls, are equally far from rendering 

 this doctrine support. Of the hitherto few skulls already engraved in the 

 " Crania Britannica," we may refer to one ancient Roman skull derived from the 

 city of York, the Roman "Eburacum." The internal capacity of this cranium 

 amounts to no less than 104-7 cubic inches. Another fine cranium of an Anglo- 

 Saxon derived from an ancient cemetery in Cambridgeshire, has an internal 

 capacity of no less than 109-6 cubic inches. As far, therefore, as these data go, 

 they give no countenance to the assumption that, as races proceed in their ad- 

 vancement from the state of barbarism upwards, their brains gradually expand. 

 With the capability of all races to make this advance, another assumption that 

 is usually associated with the former, we have nothing to do at present. 



It would be quite unnecessary to remark upon the permanency of cranial 

 forms before an Academy presided over by Morton, any more than to dwell upon 

 primitive diversity, which has already been alluded to. But the series of sknlls 

 to which the attention of the Academy has been solicited, afford additional evi- 

 dence which bears upon these points. And an attentive consideration of ancient 

 skulls will develope a series of remarkable diversities. 



Professor Morton, in his elaborate and well-reasoned work, " Crania ^gyp- 

 tica," which stands in so near a relationship to this Academy, has pointed out 

 in the most masterly manner the characteristics of the cranium of the ancient 

 Egyptians. That delicate cranial form was proper to them, whom Morton ulti- 

 mately concluded to be indigenous to the valley of the Nile, and strictly abo- 

 rignes. It was we, believe, deserving of the epithet idiogeneous, or especially 

 proper to the race, and had a relation to them alone, and to no other race, an- 

 cient or modern. There is a peculiarity in the generality of the mummified 



1857.] 



