ANTHROPOMETRY 95 



Preauricular sulcus Infrequent More common and better developed 



Sacrum Relatively high and Shorter and broader, more obliquely 



narrow set, less curved in upper portion; 



sacro-vertebral angle more promi- 

 nent 



Pelvis as a whole Strong, heavy, Less massive, smoother 



marked muscular 

 impressions 



Brim Heart-shaped More circular (or elliptic), more 



spacious 



True pelvis Relatively smaller More oblique, shallow and spacious, 



less encroached upon by ischiac 

 spines 



However, none of the above characteristics are wholly constant, and 

 there are pelves so intermediate that a correct diagnosis of sex from 

 them alone cannot be made with certainty. 



As to the long bones, those of the male are generally larger and heavier 

 than those of the female and have more pronounced muscular ridges, 

 tuberosities and impressions; but the most important and striking 

 sexual differences lie in their articular extremities, which in the bones 

 of the male are in general both absolutely and relatively larger than in 

 the female. A femur or a humerus with a small head or condyles 

 cannot be masculine, neither can bones with relatively large heads or 

 condyles be feminine. These differences are of great help in sexing 

 the skeleton or individual bones. However there are also intermediary 

 grades of development which might leave us uncertain if we had the 

 long bone only. 1 



As to the remaining larger bones of the body, the most important 

 for sexual identification are the sternum, scapulae, ribs, the spine as a 

 whole, some of the vertebrae such as the atlas, axis, and the fifth lumbar, 

 the patella, the calcaneus, and the first phalanx of the great toe. 

 In general they all show larger size, greater weight and stronger 

 development of muscular attachments in the male; and they present 

 various individual features which differ more or less in the two sexes, 

 such as the relatively longer manubrium in the female, a larger glenoid 

 cavity in the male, etc. Their utilization for sexual identification 

 stipulates naturally a special acquaintance with these various bones. 



1 Consult Dwight (Thos.), "Range and Significance of Variation in the human 

 skeleton," Bost. Med. and Surg. J., July, 1894, 73 et seq. "The size of the articular 

 surfaces of the long bones as characteristic of sex," Am. J. Anat., 1904, IV, 19-31. 



Dorsey (Geo. A.), "A sexual study of the size of the articular surfaces of the long 

 bones in aboriginal American skeletons," Bost. Med. and Surg. J., July 22, 1897. 



