CHAMBERS'S INFORMATION FOR THE PEOPLE. 



methods of anthropological research. By means 

 of it we find out the comparative development 

 of different regions of the skull in different tribes, 

 the various proportions of the trunk and extrem- 

 ities, and, most important of all, the capacity of 

 the cranial cavity or brain-case. The facts got at 

 by this method are only of value and, indeed, 

 only come within the scope of anthropology 

 when they refer, not to individuals, but to groups 

 of individuals, and are capable of being expressed 

 in tables of maxima, minima, and averages. 



As each anthropologist has his own method of 

 measurement, which often differs from those of 

 his brethren, the results obtained by different 

 observers are too often contradictory. The way 

 to measure the skull, so as to get at the com- 

 parative development of different regions, is to 

 measure the inclination of two planes bounding 

 those regions. The facial angle of Camper was 



fot in this way, by measuring the angle formed 

 y a line drawn from the forehead to the most 

 projecting part of the jawbone, meeting another 

 drawn from the base of the nose to the external 

 ear. When it was nearest a right angle, it was 

 held to indicate superior intellectual development 

 in a race. Unfortunately, M. Jacquart, of the 

 Natural History Museum in Paris, shewed that 

 it came very near a right angle in comparatively j 

 stupid people ; and that even in the homogeneous 

 population of Paris, it varied within much wider 

 limits than those Camper held to be a good test of 

 distinct species. It is now held of little account ; 

 indeed, cranial measurements are now considered 

 of little use to science, unless they are far more exact ; 

 and elaborate than this. Instead of using one : 

 cranial measurement, as did Camper, Dr Barnard 

 Davis, in his recent work, Thesaurus Craniorum, 

 the best authority on this subject, gives us no less 

 than ten. We may briefly sum them up as fol- 

 lows : (a) internal capacity of the skull expressed 

 in ounces avoirdupois ; (b) circumference of skull 

 round forehead, taken by a tape at junction of the 

 forehead and nose, and over the most prominent 

 part of the occiput ; (c) the arch of the skull, from 

 the junction of forehead and nose to the edge of 

 the foramen magnum ; (d) the intermastoid arch, 

 from the tip of one mastoid process to another ; 

 (e) longitudinal diameter, or length from fore- 

 head to occiput ; (/) transverse diameter, noting 

 whether the greatest breadth is between the 

 parietal or temporal bones on opposite sides ; 

 (g) height from the plane of the foramen magnum 

 to that of the vertex ; (K) length of face from nasal 

 suture to tip of chin ; (/) breadth of face or inter- 

 zygomatic diameter, or space between the two 

 cheek-bones ; and lastly, (j) a measurement ex- 

 pressing the proportion of the greatest length to 

 breadth of face, taking the latter as i-oo. Dr I 

 Davis determines the capacity of the brain-case ! 

 by filling it with fine sand of specific gravity j 

 1-425 ; but this is objectionable, for the sand gets ' 

 into crevices and sutures and little cavities where ; 

 no brain-matter lodged in life, and gives a false j 

 indication of the cerebral capacity of the skulls so I 

 measured. Professor Wyman of Harvard Univer- ; 

 sity, in the Proc. Boston Nat. Hist. Soc. for 1868, 

 suggests a better method. According to him, 

 you first fill the brain-case with fine shot, which 

 cannot get into crevices, &c. and then weigh the 

 cranium. Then convert the weight of material j 

 into cubic measurement by determining the cubic ' 



measurement of an ounce of the material (shot), 

 and multiplying this by the whole number of 

 ounces. Then you convert the weight of the 

 material (shot) into brain-weight by correcting 

 the difference in specific gravities between the 

 two. Another process of his, though less accu- 

 rate, is much simpler. Instead of weighing, you 

 measure the contents of the brain-case. You 

 convert the cubic contents of the skull into brain- 

 weight, by multiplying the number of cubic inches 

 by the weight of a cubic inch of water (252-5 grs.), 

 and allowing 4 per cent, for difference of specific 

 gravities of brain and water. 



Philological methods of research were once the 

 prime favourites of anthropologists. Professor 

 Huxley would indeed base the grand separating 

 distinction between man and the lower animals 

 on the faculty of language, doubtless agreeing 

 with Aristotle in saying : ' Animals have voices, 

 but man alone speaks.' The principles on which 

 the diversified languages of the world are classi- 

 fied, are treated of in another number. The study 

 of this new science of comparative philology made 

 at the outset so many revelations of unexpected 

 affinities among nations, that it seemed at one 

 time as though anthropologists were about to 

 reject all other more laborious methods of re- 

 search. But of late years, the value of lan- 

 guage as a test of race has lost a good deal 

 of its prestige. It is only one amongst many 

 tests ; and evidence derived from it must be 

 corroborated by evidence derived from history, 

 physical structure, religion, customs, &c. before it 

 can be regarded with respect. Nations have been 

 known to change their language, and adopt that of 

 nations that conquer them or enslave them ; and 

 Sir E. Tennent mentions one tribe, the Veddahs 

 of Ceylon, that are not believed to have any lan- 

 guage at all. Such being the case, language is of 

 too fluctuating a character to be relied on as an 

 infallible basis for racial classifications. Next to 

 grammatical structure, similarity in the words 

 denoting the simplest and most necessary things, 

 those most closely interwoven with the home-life 

 of the people, are studied as being likely to afford 

 the clue to the racial affinities of the tribes in 

 whose dialects they occur. As Dr Prichard said : 

 ' Tribes and families separated from each other 

 have been known to have preserved such similar 

 words for thousands of years in a degree of purity 

 that admitted of an easy recognition of this sign of 

 a common origin.' 



The study of the myths, customs, weapons, 

 implements, &c. of different tribes has greatly 

 displaced philology as a means of discovering 

 racial relationships. But identity of this sort 

 can never, any more than language, be relied on 

 as an infallible test. Mr Tylor says, in his 

 recent work on the Early History of Mankind: 

 'The principle, that man does the same thing 

 under the same circumstances, will account 

 for much, but it is very doubtful whether it can 

 be stretched far enough to account for even the 

 greater proportion of the facts in question. The 

 other side of the argument is, that the resemblance 

 is due to connection, and the truth is made up of 

 the two, though in what proportion we do not 

 know.' 



There are a few anthropological terms liable to 

 considerable ambiguity, owing to their being used 

 by different writers in different senses. These 



