72 H. B. Ferris, M.D. 



1 66, the extremes are 176 and 156, and the variation range 20. 

 This height is less in the Machiganga of both sexes than in the 

 Quichua. 



The forehead height averages in the male 53, the extremes are 

 65 and 34, with a variation range of 31. In the female the average 

 is 50. the extremes are 61 and 36, with a variation range of 25. 

 The height of the forehead is distinctly less in the Machigangas 

 than in most races, both white and black, and the range of 

 variation is surprisingly large. 



Slight alopecia was present in a few of the individuals 

 measured. 



The cephalometric morphologic facial index 



/ menton to nasion x 100 \ 



\ bizygomatic breadth ' 



averages in the male 88.4, with extremes of 95.7 and 81.1. and a 



variation range of 14.6. In the female the average index is 87.1, 



the extremes 94.6 and 77.3. and the variation range 17.3. The 



, . ■ • 1 /bizygomatic diameter X 100 \ . ,, , 



physiognomic index! 1 — , -^-. ) in the male averages 



^ -^ ° \ menton to crmion ' ° 



79.3. with extremes of 85.1 and 72.1, and a variation range of 



13.0. In the female the average is 80.3, with extremes of 86.8 



and 74.3, and a variation range of 12.5. 



The stature- face height index in the male averages for the 

 morphologic height 8.0, for both male and female, and for the 

 physiognomic height 11.4 for the male and 11.5 for the female. 



From the seriation table it can be seen that of the Machiganga 

 11.1% of the males and 26.7% of the females are euryprosopic 

 ("83.9), 33.3% males and 26.7% females mesoprosopic (84.- 

 ^/-Q)' 50% males and 33-3/^ females leptoprosopic (88.-92.9), 

 and 5.6^0 males and 13.3% females hyperleptoprosopic (93-). 

 This classification is probably somewhat erroneous, due to placing 

 the nasion too high in making the face height measurement, so 

 that a comparison with the Quichua and other races would be 

 misleading. 



On account of the small number of individuals it will not be 

 profitable to attempt an analysis of the relation of face form to 

 the head measurements and form, although the same thing 

 is probably true here as in other groups, viz., that face height 

 is more correlated with the head length than with the height, 

 cephalic index or module. 



