88 



The Journal of Heredity 



noticeable in different tribes, to a slij^ht 

 upward slant, that is, the external 

 canthi are frequently more or less 

 higher than the internal. 



5. The nasal bridge is moderately to 

 well dc\'cloiJed, and the nose in the 

 li\-ing, as well as the nasal aperture in 

 the skull (barring individual and some 

 localized excei:)tions), show medium or 

 mesorhinic relative proportions. The 

 malar regions are, as a rule, rather large 

 or prominent. 



TEETH ARE CHARACTERISTIC. 



6. The mouth is generally fairly 

 large, the lips average from medium to 

 slightly fuller than in whites, and the 

 lower facial region shows throughout a 

 medium degree of prognathism, stand- 

 ing, like the relative proportions of the 

 nose, about midway between those in the 

 whites and those characteristic of the 

 negroes. The chin is well developed, 

 not seldom square. The teeth arc of 

 medium size when compared with those 

 of jmmitive man in general, but per- 

 ceptibly larger when contrasted with 

 those of the cultured white American 

 or European; the upper incisors of the 

 Indian present an especially important 

 feature; they are characteristically 

 shovel-shaped, that is, deeply and 

 peculiarly concave on the buccal side. 

 The ears are rather large. 



7. The neck, as a rule, is of only 

 moderate length, and in health is never 

 thin ; the chest is somewhat deeper than 

 in average whites; the breasts of the 

 women are of medium size, and generally 

 more or less conical in form. There is 

 a comjiletc absence of steatopygy; the 

 lower liml)S arc less shapely and espe- 

 cially less full than in whites; the calf 

 in the majority is small. 



8. The hands and feet, as a rule, are 

 of relatively moderate or even of small 

 dimensions, and what is among the 

 most im])ortant features distinguishing 

 the Indian, the relative proportions of 

 his forearms to arms and those of the 

 distal parts of the lower limbs to the 

 l)roximal (or. in the skeleton, the radio- 

 humeral and tibio-fc moral indices) are 

 in general, throughout the two ])arts of 

 the continent, of much the same average 

 value, which \;ilnc dilTcrs from that of 



both the whites and the negroes, stand- 

 ing again in an intermediary position. 



This list of characteristics, which are, 

 broadly speaking, shared by all Amer- 

 ican natives, could readily be extended, 

 but the common features mentioned 

 ought to be sufhcient to make clear the 

 fundamental unity of the Indians. 



The question that necessarily follows 

 is: "Which, among the different peoples 

 of the globe, does the Indian as here 

 characterized most resemble r" The 

 answer, notwithstanding our imperfect 

 knowledge, can be given quite con- 

 clusi\-ely. There is a great stem of 

 humanit\' which embraces people rang- 

 ing from yellowish-white to dark brown 

 in color, with straight black hair, 

 scanty beard, hairless body, brown, 

 often more or less slanting eye, preva- 

 lently mesorhinic nose, medium alveolar 

 prognathism, and in many other essen- 

 tial features much like the American 

 native; and this stem, embracing several 

 sub-types and many nationalities and 

 tribes, occupies the eastern half of the 

 Asiatic continent and a large part of 

 Poh'nesia. 



CLOSE RELATIONSHIP. 



From the physical anthropologist's 

 point of view everything indicates that 

 the origin of the American Indian is to 

 be sought among the \'ello wish-brown 

 ])eoples mentioned. There are no two 

 large branches of humanit}' on the globe 

 that show closer fundamental physical 

 relations. 



But difficulties arise when we endeav- 

 or to assign the origin of the Indian to 

 some ])articular branch of the yellowish- 

 brown ])oi)ulation. We find that he 

 stands ciuite as closely related to some 

 of the Malaysian peoples as to a part 

 of the Tibetans, or some of the north- 

 eastern Asiatics. It is doubtless this 

 fact that accounts for the hypotheses 

 that attribute the derivation of the 

 American Indians partly to the "Tar- 

 tars" and partly to the Polynesians. 



All that may be .said on this occasion 

 is that the circumstances jioint strongly 

 to a coming, not strictly a migration, 

 after the glacial period, and over land, 

 ice, water, or by all these media com- 

 bined, from north-eastern Asia, of 



