osteometry; the measurement of the bones 149 



measured "in the oblique position", i.e., physiological length; the tibia 

 uses the medial condyle at the proximal end, but includes the entire 

 malleolus distally, a departure from the rule laid clown above; the other 

 bones are used in greatest length. 



3. If the bones are dry, and deprived of cartilage, add 2 mm. to the 

 length measurement of each bone. 



4. Find the nearest length for each bone separately, and set down the 

 total stature expected. Lengths that fall in between those given will 

 furnish their total stature through a simple calculation. 



5. The series of total statures thus obtained should be averaged up in 

 the usual way, by adding all together and dividing by the number of 

 bones used. The resulting average is that of the cadaveral height. 



6. The living height is considered to be 20 mm., less than the cadaveral 

 height. 



7. If you have the corresponding bones of the two sides, measure 

 both, and use the average of the two for the measurement. If you possess 

 the radius and tibia, the ulna and fibula need not be measured. 



Although the values of this Table have been deduced from French 

 bodies, and may not be wholly applicable beyond the confines of these 

 and related peoples, still the work of Rahon* who applied them to a very 

 large number of ancient men, in part absolutely prehistoric,, possesses 

 considerable interest. Some of his results follow: 



mm 

 Neandertal skeleton 1613 



Spy skeletons 1590 



Skeleton, La Madelaine 1665 



Old man of Cro Magnon 1716 



Mentone skeleton, 1732 



Dolmen of "Cave-aux Fees" males, 1600; females, 1470 



Dolmen of "Bray-sur Seine males, 1600; females, 1492 



Merovingian Period, one skeleton of 



of each sex males, 1771; females, 1579 



Burgundians, 5th. Century males, 1646; females, 1518 



Carolingian Period males, 1674; females, 1585 



In all these the height given is that for the living. It is to be noted 

 that the two first are now accredited to a distinct species, making their 

 inclusion within this table quite inapplicable. The rest seem fairly 

 reliable. 



* Rahon, J.; La taille d'apres les ossements pr6historiques. Rev. Ec. Anthropol. 

 T. 2, p. 234 +. 1892. 



Recherches sur les ossements humains anciens et prehistoriques en vue de la 

 reconstitution de la taille. Mem. Soc. Anthropol. Paris, Series 2. T. 4, pp. 

 403 + 1893. 



