250 BULLETIN 183, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 



some cases a low cranial index. Nevertheless, I am inclined to look 

 upon the deformity as being slight to medium instead of pronounced. 



Hooton does not describe or picture the deformity of the Turner 

 series other than by saying that it is a slight grade of occipital 

 flattening affecting 8 out of 43 specimens (one other was of medium 

 grade) . 



Speaking of remains from Hopewellian sites in Wisconsin, Mc- 

 Kern (1931, p. 214) states that "not a few of the skulls showed 

 marked artificial deformation of the occiput, probably due to pro- 

 longed contact with a hard cradle board during infancy." 



In a preliminai-y discussion of this material (Stewart, 1940a) I 

 suggested that the extreme narrowness of the frontal bone (mini- 

 mum frontal diameter 9.2 cm. in 9 males, 8.5 cm. in 6 females) might 

 be due to an artificial shaping in childhood. This idea was based 

 partly on Hrdlicka's description of Fowke's specimen No. 131 (see 

 p. 246) to the effect that each side of the frontal showed a depression 

 as though made by a small pad. It should be stated, however, that 

 none of the other specimens, with the possible exception of "Han- 

 sen 3," gives a similar indication. Further study of the transverse 

 frontal curvature with the aid of the Schwartz stereograph (fig. 21) 

 has shown that these outlines, which conform to arcs of circles with 

 radii ranging from 4.5 to 6.5 cm., can be duplicated in part among 

 other long-headed groups. I have not been able yet to duplicate the 

 curves that conform to an arc of 4.5 cm. radius. However, my con- 

 clusion now is that this marked curvature and narrowness of the 

 frontal is in general an expression of the natural longheadedness of 

 the group; that it appears exaggerated when combined with occi- 

 pital flattening; and that in a few cases it may have been increased 

 by artificial means. 



It may be pointed out that the frontal curvature in the Porter 

 mound skulls is not unusual (Neumann, 1941a) ; the curves corre- 

 spond to arcs of the following radii: T.O (350562), 6.0 (350563, 

 350564), and 5.5 cm. (350565). The one skull recovered at Marks- 

 ville by Setzler in 1933 (U. S. N. M. No. 369261) has a frontal curva- 

 ture corresponding to an arc of 5.5 cm. radius. With one exception 

 these figures fit within the range of the Kansas City series (4.5-6.5 

 cm.). 



Incidentally, the two skulls recovered from the Veazey mound in 

 Louisiana, which has Hopewellian relationships (Collins, 1941), 

 show deformity of the pseudocircular type (Stewart, 1941). 



Measurements. — Table 13 also gives the detailed individual cranial 

 measurements. These are summarized in table 15 in comparison with 

 the Ohio Ho})ewellians on record and the Alabama Shell mound crania 

 (Newman and Snow, 1942). I have employed the Shell mound crania 

 for comparison because Neumann (1941a) has compared the Hope- 



