90 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 7i 



shortest (or broadest) in Queensland (with lowest facial angle) and 

 especially in northwest Australia. 



On the whole the lower types of the Australian appear to be those 

 of the northwest and north, the higher those of the southeastern parts 

 of the continent. 



Admixture (Papuan) and local variation are doubtless both in- 

 volved in the observed differences of characters. But these differ- 

 ences are so appreciable that anthropology will hardl)^ be justified 

 henceforth to refer merely to "the Australian." 



AUSTRALIANS AND TASMANIANS 



A comparison of the two groups shows that the Tasmanian was not 

 of the identical type with the Australian of any part of the continent; 

 but he was close enough, in general, to be recognized as a near relation 

 and probably a mere local variant of the Australian. 



Compared with the Australian more in detail, the Tasmanian is 

 seen to have been somewhat more broad-headed. 



The vault of his skull was slightly lower than the general AustraUan 

 average, but above that of two of the Australian groups. 



In size of the head the Tasmanian was slightly above the Australian 

 average, but equal or even a trace lower than two of the Australian 

 contingents. 



In facial index the Tasmanian was slightly lower than the Aus- 

 tralian in the males, somewhat more so in the females, due to lower 

 facial height (the bizygomatic breadth being practically even) . 



The basion-nasion length, especially if taken relatively to the 

 length of the skull, is nearly the same in the two people. 



The facial angle in the Tasmanians, though their face is lower, 

 exceeds on the average by 1 degree that of the Australians. 



The orbital index of the Tasmanians is plainly lower — due to lower 

 orbits — than it is in the Australians. 



The nasal index in the male Tasmanians is close to the average of 

 the Australian males, but in the females the Tasmanians show an 

 appreciably higher index (greater breadth) ; and practically the same 

 condition exists as to the "palatal" (alveolar arch) index and the 

 arch itself. 



In general, it is seen, the Tasmanians had a somewhat broader 

 head, somewhat lower face and orbits, and somewhat broader (or 

 shorter) nose and palate, than the Australians. But the two people 

 are so near, particularly when we compare the crania individually or 

 when the Tasmanians are contrasted with some of the regional 

 Australian groups, that the two strains can not but be regarded as 

 of fundamentally the same race. The Tasmanians may therefore, 

 it seems, be legitimately considered as merely a subtype of the 



