ON METOPISM 37 
opportunity for the forehead to grow broader than usual. It 
seems therefore quite reasonable that in metopical skulls the 
forehead is broader, this being the natural consequence of the 
fact that the growth-centrum remains longer in an active state. 
With regard to the problem of metopism, observations as 
well as theoretical considerations have convinced me, that the 
common opinion about the aetiology of this phenomenon is an 
erroneous one. As to the facts, I have been unable to confirm 
the existence of any relation between metopism and a particu- 
cular shape of the skull, the frontal suture persisting in dolicho- 
cephalic crania as frequently as in brachycephalic ones, and the 
index cephalicus being in average equal in metopical and non- 
metopical skulls. Furthermore, the metopical crania of my 
collection were not larger than the normal specimens, consequent- 
ly the average of the brain-weight should be equal in both groups. 
There is but one fact which I was able to confirm, namely the 
greater breadth of the forehead in metopical skulls, a phenome- 
non easily understood as a logical consequence of the protracted 
activity of the frontal suture. 
And as to the theoretical side of the problem, I do not agree 
with the current opinion that metopism is caused by an increased 
intracranial pressure, the result of a greater development of the 
brain. First, because the least indication of such an increased 
development is wanting, and secondly because in pathological 
cases, as in hydrocephaly, in which undoubtedly the intracra- 
nial pressure had considerably risen, the frontal suture disap- 
pears as in normal circumstances. 
Before entering into an explanation of my views upon the 
aetiology of metopism, I wish to discuss briefly the argument 
that metopism is less frequent in the lower races. As mentioned 
in the introduction to this paper, this fact is utilized as a proof 
that metopism, caused by a larger expansion of the brain, should 
be a symptom of higher intelligence. I think this opinion can- 
not withstand a serious analysis. If one accepts the principle 
that metopism is a symptom of intellectual superiority as true, 
because it is more frequent in culture races, than in uncivilized 
ones, one must accept also the consequence of this principle, that 
