890 REPORT— 1892. 



which Dr. Beddoe has so well begun. I would commend this work to the 

 consideration of the provincial university colleges, especially those iu outlying 

 districts. 



Of all the parts of the human frame, the skull is that upon which anthro- 

 pologists have in the past expended the most of their time and thought. "We have 

 now, in Great Britain alone, at least four collections of skulls, each of which includes 

 more than a thousand specimens, and in the other great national and university 

 museums of Europe there are large collections available for study and comparison. 



Despite all the labour that has been bestowed on the subject, craniometric 

 literature is at pi-esent as unsatisfactory as it is dull. Hitherto observations have 

 been concentrated on cranial measurements as methods for the discrimination of 

 the skulls of different races. Scores of lines, arcs, chords, and indexes have been 

 devised for this purpose, and the diagnosis of skulls has been attempted by a pro- 

 cess as mechanical as that whereby we identify certain issues of postage-stamps 

 by counting the nicks in the margin. But there is underlying all these no unify- 

 ing hypothesis, so that when we, in our sesquipedalian jargon, describe an Austra- 

 lian skull as microcephalic, phsenozygous, tapehio-dolichocephalic, prognathic, 

 platyrhine, hypselopalatine, leptostaphyline, dolichuranic, chamaeprosopic, and 

 microseme, we are no nearer to the formulation of any philosophic concept of the 

 general principles which have led to the assumption of these characters by the 

 cranium in question, and we are forced to echo the apostrophe of Von Torok, 

 ' Vanity, thy name is Oraniology.' 



It was perhaps needful in the early days of the subject that it should pass 

 through the merely descriptive stage ; but the time has come when we should seek 

 for something better, when we should regard the skull not as a whole complete in 

 itself, nor as a crystalline geometrical solid, nor as an invariable structure, but as a 

 marvellously plastic part of the human frame, whose form depends on the co-opera- 

 tion of influences, the respective shares of which in moulduig the head are capable 

 of qualitative if not of quantitative analysis. Could measurements be devised 

 which would indicate the nature and amounts of these several influences, then, indeed, 

 would craniometry pass from its present empirical condition and become a genuine 

 scientific method. We are yet far from the prospect of such an ideal system, and 

 all practical men will realise the immense, but not insuperable, difficulties in the 

 way of its formulation. 



In illustration of the profound complexity of the problem which the craniolo- 

 gist has to face, I would ask your indulgence while I set out a few details to show 

 the several factors whose influence should be numerically indicated by such a mode 

 of measurement. 



The parts composing the skull may be resolved into four sets : there is, first, 

 the brain-case ; secondly, the parts which subserve mastication and the preparation 

 of the food for digestion ; thirdly, the cavities containing the organs of the senses 

 of hearing, sight, and smell ; and, fourthly, those connected with the production 

 of articulate speech. If our measurements are to mean anything, they should give 

 us a series of definite numbers indicating the forms, modifications, and relative 

 size of these parts, and their settings with regard to each other and to the rest of 

 the body. 



To take the last point first, it needs but a small consideration to show that the 

 parts of the skull are arranged above and below a certain horizontal plane, which 

 18 definite (although not easily ascertained) in every skull, human or animal. This 

 is the plane of vision. The familiar lines of Ovid — 



Pronaque cum spectent animalia cetera terram, 

 Os homini sublime dedit ; ccelumque tueri 

 Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus — 



are anatomically untrue, for the normal quadruped and man alike, in their most 

 natural position, have theii- axes of vision directed to the horizon. Systems of 

 measurement based upon any plane other than this are essentially artificial. 

 There are at the outset difficulties in marking the plane accurately on the 

 ekull, and it is to be deplored that the anthropologists of difi"erent nations should 



