THE SKULL AS A BASIS FOR RACE CLASSIFICATION. 15 
THE SKULL AS A BASIS FOR RACE 
CLASSIFICATION. 
An Appress by Davip Hepsury, M.D., F.R.S.E., V.-P.R.P.S.E., 
Lecturer on Regional Anatomy, University of Edinburgh. 
(Read 10th January 1901.) 
THROUGHOUT the entire range of the Vegetable and Animal 
Kingdoms observers have recognised that certain individuals 
possess common features in greater or smaller numbers, and 
consequently that they resemble each other more closely 
than they do other individuals of the same Kingdom. In 
other words, there is a natural basis upon which to raise a 
classification. For this reason we have adopted such terms 
as Kingdom, Sub-kingdom, Class, Sub-class, Order, Sub- 
order, Family, Genus, Species. Under each of these terms. 
we associate a certain number of characters which are borne 
in common by the plants or animals which constitute the 
members of the group. Nevertheless, we do not insist that 
each member of the group should be a detailed duplicate of 
all the other members, for we recognise that much Variation 
is possible within the limits of even a single species. 
Man, as represented by existing Races and Peoples, is 
usually credited with the position of a single Genus, Homo, 
containing a single species, sapiens, because it is considered 
that, whatever Man’s colour or geographical distribution 
may be, there is a sufficient number of structural characters to 
warrant the association of the most primitive savage and the 
highest product of modern civilisation under the same species. 
I do not propose to discuss the question of what con- 
stitutes a Race and what constitutes a People, nor do I 
propose to discuss the evidence which might be adduced in 
favour of the view that H. sapiens has been preceded by ZH. 
insapiens. My object is to show that in spite of the structural 
resemblances which exist among the members of the genus. 
Homo, there are important structural differences which are 
fundamental, and which are sufficiently distinctive to enable- 
