ARCHAOLOGICAL AND ETHNOLOGICAL RESEARCHES IN CRETE. 233 
original memoirs” at least suggest that the term armenoid is applicable 
again. I might add that the frequency of brachycephali in the eneo- 
lithic Sardinian series is in strong contrast with the variety of that 
type among modern inhabitants of Sardinia. It would almost seem as 
though the brachycephalic type had been ‘ bred out,’ or that it never 
established a footing in Sardinia, which is very different from Crete 
therefore. 
The majority of writers appeal to invasions and migrations to 
account for the presence of these ancient brachycephalic individuals. 
Moreover the invasions are said to have occurred as far back as the 
neolithic period, and as for their source, that is supposed to be Eastern, 
with a course through Asia Minor in the cases considered. 
ae dl We 
Fia. 6.—A skull (No. 9D) from Palaikastro; Norma facialis (4%). 
Against such opinions we must set that of Professor Giuffrida- 
Ruggeri. He admits invasions only during the more recent periods. 
He insists on the extreme antiquity of the brachycephalic type as an 
indigenous form in Western Europe. He regards it as autochthonous, 
and its appearance he ascribes to the effects of environment. This he 
supposes to have been influential from the very earliest times. 
To discuss these alternative views is not possible here. But refer- 
ence must be made to the very valuable paper (by Professor Giuffrida- 
Ruggeri) on the physical anthropology of the Dinaric and Danubian 
regions. 
The brachycephalic Cretan crania of Mycenean antiquity (Nos. 19D 
and 25D) may well deserve discussion in connection with Bronze Age 
1 Cf. footnote to Table V. 
