HedliCka] skeletal EEMAINS OP EAELY MAN 281 



The mastoids are somewhat above medium feminine in size; the 

 supramastoidal crests are but slightly developed. 



The occiput is moderately protruding. Postero-inferiorly a portion 

 of the bone is depressed, posthumously. Dorsally the surface is 

 rather smooth, though a fairly marked transverse ridge exists under 

 the insertions of the trapezii. 



The sutures, particularly the lambdoid, show submedium serration, 

 as general among Indians; they are all patent or nearly so exter- 

 nally, but ventrally the coronal sagittal and lambdoid are obhterated. 

 There are no Wormian bones. 



The basal parts show feminine development, otherwise no special 

 features. The occipital condyles are small. 



The facial structures are defective. The orbital borders are sharp. 

 The nasal and orbital region indicates a feminine skull. 



On the whole the examination shows plainly an average, moderate- 

 sized Indian cranium, not one feature of wliich points to anytliing 

 more primitive. The entire specimen shows nothing whatever 

 " bestial" or that could not be found in a modern female Indian skull, 

 particularly in that of a woman of small stature. 



Measurements : 



Vault: cm. 



Diameter: ant. -post, max., 17.4 cm. ; lat. max 13. 2 



Cephalic index 75. 9 



Basion-bregma height, approximately 12. 6 



Height between line connecting auditory canals and bregma 11. 6 



Diameter frontal: min., 8.4 cm. ; max 10. 5 



Face: 



Diameter bizygomatic maximum 12. 7 



Circumference, maximum (above supraorbital ridges) 48. 



Nasion-opisthion arc 35. 8 



Nasion-bregma, 11.7 cm.; Bregma-lambda, 12.1 cm.; Lambda-opisthion . . . 12.0 



Transverse arc, approximately 28. 



Maximum length of right temporal 8. 6 



Foramen mag., max. length, 3.1 cm. ; max. breadth, approx 3. 



Thickness of left parietal above and along the squamous suture mm. .3 to 5 



Thickness of frontal bone at points corresponding to eminences mm . . 5 



The module (mean diameter) is 14.4 cm., and the capacity of the 

 skull may be estimated at or near 1,200 cc. 



As every anthropologist who has occupied himself with American 

 skeletal material will recognize, the above measurements are just 

 about such as could be expected in a subdolichocephalic Indian 

 female of small stature. The data relating to the female California 

 skuUs pubhshed by the writer in 1906 ^ may be given for comparison. 



The two sets of measurements are so similar that further comments 

 on the Indian nature of the skull would be superfluous. 



1 Contribution to the Physical Anthropology of California; in University of California Publications, iv, 

 No. 2, Berkeley, 1906, p. 51 et seq. 



