Observatmis on Ancient Egyptian Crania. 269 



evident that no inferences drawn from Greek or other inscrip- 

 tions could have applied to them. 



The following is an ethnographic analysis of this series of 

 crania : 



Egyptian form, - - - - - 11 

 Egyptian form, with traces of Negro lineage, 2 



Negroid form, 1 



Pelasgic form, ----- 2 



Semitic form, ----- l 



~vr 



Remarks. 



1. The Egyptian form is admirably characterized in eleven of 

 these heads, and corresponds in every particular with the Nilotic 

 physiognomy, as indicated by monumental and sepulchral evi- 

 dences in my Crania JGgyptiaca, viz. — the small, long and nar- 

 row head, with a somewhat receding forehead, narrow and rather 

 projecting face, and delicacy of the whole osteological structure. 

 No hair remains, and the bony meatus of the ear corresponds 

 with that of all other Caucasian nations. 



Two other heads present some mixture of Negro lineage with 

 the Egyptian, which is expressed in the conformation and ex- 

 pression of the facial bones, more particularly as seen in the 

 greater breadth and flatness of the face, and a stronger develop- 

 ment of the upper maxilla. 



Of these thirteen crania, eleven are adult, of which the largest 

 has an internal capacity of 93 cubic inches, and the smallest 76, 

 giving a mean of 86 cubic inches for the size of the brain. This 

 measurement exceeds, by only three cubic inches, the average 

 derived from the entire series of Egyptian heads in my Crania 

 Ji]gyptiaca. 



The facial angle of the adult heads gives a mean of 82°, the 

 largest rising as high as 86°, and the smallest being 78°. Two 

 other heads are those of children, in whom the Egyptian confor- 

 mation is perfect, and these give, respectively, the remarkably 

 large facial angle of 89° and 91°. The mean adult angle is 

 greater than that given by the large series measured in the Crania 

 .S^gyptiaca. Is this owing to the fact, that the heads now under 

 consideration belonged to persons of distinction, and probably, 

 therefore, of education and refinement ? 



Vol. XLviii, No. 2.— Jan.-March, 1845. 35 



