THE HURON RACE AND ITS HEAD-FORM. 133 



nent, and of the ordinary Indian character. The chief peculiarities 

 noticeable in No. 6, — with the exception of the absence of the super- 

 ciliary ridges, — appear in another example of the same long type of 

 Huron skull, No. 7, figured on Plate III. As shown when viewed 

 from behind, both skulls are of unusual breadth at the base, and 

 between the temporal bones; the mastoid processes are large; and in 

 profile the outline of the forehead, especially in No. 7, is markedly 

 receding. 



But the specialties for which these skulls invite attention now, are 

 chiefly shown in the vertical views. No. 6 .presents in this aspect a, 

 long symmetrical oval, in which the outline of the occiput differs very 

 partially from that of the frontal bone. In Noo 7, as will be seen from 

 the table of measurements, the extreme length, as compared with the 

 breadth, is still more remarkable ; but the view is taken so as to show 

 more of the forehead ; and the protuberant character of the occiput 

 must be judged by the lateral view. The sutures in No. 7 are closed ; 

 and much both of the sagittal and lambdoldal suture is nearly oblite- 

 rated by ossification. In neither example is there any trace of the 

 prominent parietal protuberances, or posterior excess of breadth, with 

 the narrowing towards the frontal region, which ordinarily constitute 

 characteristic features of the Indian head, and are so manifest in the 

 vertical view of the remarkable brachycephalic skull from a Huron 

 ossuary shown on p. 126. So greatly indeed does this remarkable type 

 deviate from the prevailing head-form, alike of the dolichocephalic and 

 brachycephalic Indian skull, that were it not for the characteristic 

 faciai features, and the undoubted recovery of the skulls from a 

 Huron ossuary, I should have been inclined to reject them as wrongly 

 classed among Indian crania. A comparison with the normal male 

 Huron skull, as shown on Plate I, and a reference to the contrast in 

 relative breadth and length of No. 5 of the above table, in which its 

 proportions are placed alongside of those of the other two, furnish 

 means forjudging of the differences between them. 



On turning originally to the study of the Huron head-form, I was 

 prepared to anticipate a prevailing uniformity of type, owing to seem- 

 ingly favourable circumstances of isolation. But the comprehensive 

 generalizations of earlier American ethnologists, under the guidance of 

 Dr. Morton, which led to the doctrine of a homogeneous cranial type 

 for the American aborigines, has ev^ery where failed when subjected to 

 the crucial test of detailed observation. The idea even of a uniform 



