HRDLifKA] SKELETAL REMAINS OF EARLY MAN 229 



cm. 

 Length, maximum 18. 6 



Breadth, maximum 14. 1 



Diameter frontal minimum 9. 6 



Diameter bizygomatic maximum, about 14. 2 



Nasion-alveolar point height, about 7. 5 



Circumference, horizontal 53. 



Circumference, transversal 33. 5 



Circumference, antero-posterior, frontal 13. 2 



Circumference, antero-posterior, parietal 14. 3 



Diameter antero-posterior frontal, about 11. 5 



Diameter antero-posterior parietal 12. 4 



Auricular height 12. 3 



Frontal height 8. 5 



More recently ^ Lehmann-Nitsche classes the skull of Arrecifes with 

 those of Frias, Saladero, Samborombon, Fonteziielas, Chocorl, IVIira- 

 mar, and Necochea, all of which, with the Carcaraiia bones, are re- 

 garded as Superior Pampean and hence Quaternary. But these cra- 

 nia "represent no somatologic characteristic which is not found also 

 in the existing natives of South America and especially in the same 

 Pampean and Patagonian regions, and there is even noted a certain 

 amount of variation in the different examples." 



Finally, in 1910 the Arrecifes skidl is also briefly reported on by 

 Mochi.2 Tills author shows that the norma verticalis of the specimen 

 is ellipsoid ; the vault is not chamsecephalic, as classified by Lehmann- 

 Nitsche. who must have made an error in liis figures, but, as already 

 noted by Rivet, it is hipsicephalic ; the face is pyramidal, chamse- 

 prosopic, the orbital index low. The "new characteristics" brought 

 out "demonstrate that the skull belongs to the cranial group of the 

 type known as that of Lagoa Santa, and thereby shows an affinity 

 with the dolicho-acrocephalic oceanic type, with the Ellipsoides pelas- 

 gicus of Sergi, and with the Quaternary (or regarded as such) European 

 skulls of Galley Hill, Engis, and Brno [Briin]. On the other hand, it 

 has nothing in common with the types which, rightly or wrongly, are 

 considered essentially American." ^ 



These conclusions impress one, especially one who knows per- 

 sonally the sympathetic author, as very unfortunate. They involve 

 in the comparison racial and ancient elements which are wholly 

 irrelevant to the specimen under consideration, and largely so to 

 the whole subject of man's age in South America in its present hazy 

 stage. On what common basis, for instance, can tlie late diluvial 

 skull of Brno be compared with the skull of Arrecifes, even if the latter 



1 El hombre f6.sil pampeano; in Bol. Oftc. Nac. Est., La Paz, Bolivia, vi, 1910, pp. 363-366. 



2 Moehi, A., Appunti sulla paleoantropologia argentina; in ArcJi. per I'Antr. e la Etn.. xl, Fiienze, 1910, 

 pp. 211-218. 



2 " Non ha invcce niente di comune con i tipi che a torto o a ragione si considerano come essenzialmente- 

 americani." 



