42 CIRCUMFERENCE OF CHEST — HEIGHT. 



bo 2.50 pounds. If the range of the tables given had extended furtlier in the direc- 

 tion of lower statures, the result of the comparison would not have been so discrepant 

 from Mr. Hutchinson's conclusions. 



It has l:)een stated, in the historical sketch of anthropometry, in the introduction 

 to this Avork, that the cardinal fallacy in all theoretical canons of human proportions 

 was the attempt to force a relation, founded upon figures or diagrams, between the parts 

 of the body.- The same attractive error has, to some extent, influenced those whose 

 better-directed judgment has led them to measure the living subject. In 1844, Mr. W. 

 B. Brent read a paper before the British Association, in which he authoritatively 

 announced several rules of the kind alluded to. Hutchinson, who thought, and stated, 

 that Brent knew more of the proportions of the living man than any other person exist- 

 ing, seems to have accepted the statements of the latter without verification. Subse- 

 quentl)^, he re-announced them as formulas, in his article upon the Thorax, in Todd's 

 Cyclopedia of Anatomy and Physiology. From this source, they have been repeatedly 

 copied by writers on statistics, and especially by writers on recruiting, without any 

 suspicion as to their reliability. It is probable that they were derived from a small 

 number of measurements, as the extensive observations of Quetelet, Gould, and the 

 copious records of this office have shown the untrustworthiness of all the rules in ques- 

 tion. This has been demonstrated, in nearly every instance, in the introduction.- But 

 one statement of great practical importance, and which has been often quoted as 

 authoi'itative, will more properly be examined in this place. Brent has given formulas 

 of a somewhat arbitrary character, by which to ascertain from the stature the circum- 

 ference of the chest. He gives these directions : 



"Relation of the external chest to the height, measured over the nipples. 



"Minimum chest: ^ of the stature — -gV of the stature = circumference of chest. 



"Medium chest: J of the stature -\- xV of the stature = circumference of chest. 



"Maximum chest: | of the stature zz: circumference of chest. 



"To apply these rules to practice, take an instance of a man five feet one inch in 

 height : 



"Minimum chest: height 61 inches, i zz: 30.5 inches — ^V = 29.5 inches circum- 

 ference of chest. 



"Medium chest: height 61 inches, ^ zz:'30.5 inches + tV (= 4 07 inches) rz 34.57 

 inches circumference of chest. 



"Maximum chest: lieight 61 inches, § iz: 40.7 inches circumference of chest." 



In conformity with these rules, he constructed a table, showing the minimum, 



' Of this theoretic human figure, it may be well said : " Its data are figmeuts^subje'ctive coustructions iu which 

 formal elements are traiisniuted into material elements, relations are transformed into objects, abstractions are personi- 

 fied and endowed with reality." Uixtoi-i/ of philosophy, G. H. Lewes, 3d edit., vol. i, p. Iv, 1867. 



- See p. Ixxviii. Brent's rule, that the distauee between the nipples was exactly one-l'ourth part of the circumference 

 of the chest on that plane, has been made use of by a French surgeon in some valuable and extensive observations on 

 the inlluence of disease upon the thoracic walls. In order to avoid disturbing the patients, he, in every case, " measured 

 the distance between the nipples, that being an exact fourth of the circumference." These measurements were made daily, 

 and changes in the size of the thorax recorded therefrom. The paper, containing the result of these observations, was 

 read before the Paris Academy of Medicine, and the rapporteur, M. Barth, expressed no disapproval nor doubt as to the 

 manner in which they had been conducted. (liechcrches sur Ics dimensions de la poitrine dans h'ur rapports avcc la lubercu- 

 lisatiiin pulmoiiairc, par M. Hknui Ginthac (de Bordeaux), Bull, de I'Acad. de mdd., v. xxxv, j). 835, 1870.) It has been 

 established by numerous observations th.at tlio mean iuter-.areolar distance is to the circumference of the chest as '^i to 

 100, instead of iJ.'>, as stated, leading to an erroneous result of ISJ per cent, below the real girth. 



