in the Maldive Islands and Minikot. maith 
altogether sufficient to justify the abandonment of the enquiry in 
this direction. In view, however, of the small numbers of the 
groups compared, the quest can hardly be pursued further here 
with any prospect of success. The contrasts might be attributed 
to the difference in circumstances. For the Maldive folk are pre- 
sumably less favourably situated than the inhabitants of Ceylon. 
We know little of the way in which Risley obtained his records, 
and of the social status of his subjects. But the Moormen are 
characteristically Moslem, a feature already remarked as distinctive 
of the Maldive islanders, if their names can be held to provide 
evidence on this point. And again the relation of the Moormen 
to the Malay colonies mentioned by Prichard (v. supra, p. 26), 
remains to be investigated. 
TasLeE VIII. 
ett : 22 Moormen 49 Maldive men 
Character (Risley) (Gardiner) 
SUEIUMIIC INE ey dallas cee telly 1625 1590 
LEI@rieslonh (SihiinaveR Soho mhabeansnoonedose aacouor 815'8 795°7 
Ratio: sitting height to stature=100 50°2 50°04 
ea plen othe wen: sass. uc se ceo st anceneners 182 (186)* 191°2 
EVE AAU TEMG TIG me cece cenccnheceasiesiscese vere 144 147:2 
Ven pWeiolatertansscasciosmiensinceswoaseesss 130:2 130-0 
INS ABC OIN Te tee as andes cwissenece ne s-oes AT°7 49°8 
INngeul GAiclilal G2 Saecupe aneeH ABR Sea tne nana 38°5 38°04 
Weplalichnd exes. a. .cd.s-shetaccesscse al (rye 76°2 
INiaisaileiivG Oxany Qc Acne. coaudeiaedevesesse 80°7 76:2 
* Flower’s method. About 4mm. to be added to the cephalic length and 2 units 
subtracted from the cephalic index, for comparison with groups in which the 
maximum cephalic length is recorded. 
The Tamils of Ceylon are even taller than the Moormen, their 
heads are narrower and their noses are broader. The comparison 
with the Maldive islanders fails more definitely and conspicuously 
here, though it may be remarked that the Moorman probably 
represents a blend into which a distinct Tamil element enters. 
When the Indian peninsula is considered, a vastly greater 
range of possibilities presents itself. 
In the first place, our interest must be directed inevitably to 
the comparison with such “aboriginal” hill-tribes of the Nilgiris 
as the Irulas and Kurumbas. But in my opinion the comparison 
fails conspicuously. And the failure is determined chiefly by 
the difference in the nasal index, for in this respect the contrast 
is very marked between the wide nose of the hill-tribe types and 
the relatively narrow noses of the islanders. 
