50 Berry and Robertson : 



seemed to be decidedly weakened, and he stated that so far as 

 he could remember the only reason for rejecting such crania 

 was their rather large cubic capacity, the largest being not 

 more than 1450 c.c 



To this we rei)ly that, although unusual, such a large cubic 

 capacity is not unknown amongst Tasmanian aboriginals. 

 Skull No. 7 in Turner's paper, which we have alieady quoted, 

 has a capacity of U30 c.c, whilst Klaatsch,'^* speaking of the 

 Australian, says : '" Owing to the great variation met with m 

 the capacity of rlie l)rain cavity, as shown by all observers, e.g., 

 Turner, Krausc. it is not to be wondered at that there are 

 some Australian skulls \\bich are comparaV)le with the average 

 type of higher races, wli'le there are others which even exceed 

 the European average. This does not prove any closer relation- 

 ship of the larger Australian skulls with those of other races, 

 but demonstrates an independent specialisation taking rise from 

 a common pithecanthropoid root, in conjunction with other 

 races, at a stage when the brain capacity was relatively small." 



3. Our third reason — the last and weightiest — -for including 

 these six crania as genuine Tasmanian pure bloods, is that 

 every one presents over 90 per cent, of the features so charac- 

 teristically found in the skull of the Tasmanian a1)original, and 

 this, we think, should finally set at rest any doubts as to their 

 authenticity. 



It will easily l)e understood that the long isolation of the 

 Tasnumians. the prolonged inbreeding, and the total absence of 

 any extraneous racial crossings, have caused certain morpho- 

 logical cliaracteristics to be absolutely ingrained in the crania. 

 Anyone who has hjindled Tasmanian crania in large numbers 

 will have forced u^Don him the striking similarity of these 

 crania, and in a very short space of time will l)e educated up to 

 the recognition of a Tasmanian skull from amongst any others. 



In a preliminary communication such as this we cannot enter 

 into the question of these characteristics. They are fully set 

 forth in almost all recent meujoirs on the sul)ject. It will sutHce 

 to point out some of the more striking peculiarities. 



In tiornia verticalis there is the characteristic keeling along 

 the line of the sutura sagittalis, the well-defined tul)cr parietale, 

 th€ ol)ovate (jutline, the dolichoccphaly, tlie small si/.c of tlie 



