ANTHROPOLOGICAL RESULTS. 423 



deduces his races and vârieties from his more than 1500 South-Sea skulls, as a physicist 

 différences his colours with a spectroscope, more than one will not be able to suppress a 

 slight doubt about the trustworthiness of the far-reaching conclusions. VOLZ based his division 

 principally on the length-breadth-, length-height- and breadth-height indices of the skulls. On 

 the contrary SERGI [202] does not think this method very recommendable, as he estimâtes 

 the value of those indices being rather problematic. On the other hand he thinks the capacity 

 of a skull one of its fundamental qualities. He classified his 400 Melanesian skulls (coming 

 from a very limited territory) in 1 1 vârieties, three of which were subdivided in sub-varieties, 

 two of which were founded on two, and one even on one skull ! Reading in his essay 

 ". . . . erstaunte ich ùber die grosze Verschiedenheit in den charakteristischen Formen", I 

 wondered, why individual variability was simply ruled out and besides, what peculiar 

 meaning must be attributed hère to the epithet characteristic. It is easy to understand that 

 SERGl's work inspired HAGEN to the following tirade: [6i[ "An die Kraniologie, dièse sprôde 

 Schône, wurdc von unserm besten Geistern nur allzuviel Zeit und Miihe verschwendet ohne 

 zu nennenswerten Resultaten zu gelangen. Den Vogel in dieser Richtung schosz der Italienische 

 Professor Sergi ab, der — natiirlich nur nach Schàdeln ! — Untersuchungen ùber Menschen- 

 (rectius Schàdel, d. V.) Varietàten in Mélanésien anstellte und glùcklich schon fur den kleinen 

 d'Entrecasteaux Archipel nicht weniger als elf derselben „nachwies" und mit hùbschen Namen, 

 wie z. B. Lophocephalus, brachyclitometopus, etc. belegte. Regalia hat die Absurditàt solchen 

 Vorgehens richtig gekennzeichnet, indem er sagt, man kàme damit schlieszlich so weit, zwei 

 leibliche Brùder verschiedenen Menschenvarietàten zuzàhlen zu miissen." The funny side of 

 the case however is that Sergi expresses himself in his own study as follows : "Whoever 

 vvishes to obtain an idea of the chaos that reigns hère, let him read the Crania Ethnica of 

 the QUATREFAGES and HAMY; he would need Ariadne's clue to find his way in this labyrinth 

 of skull-descriptions, which lead to no positive resuit." MEYER, from whose Negrito-book [ 123] 

 I took this passage, adds: "but whether the method followed by SERGI will lead any further, 

 remains to be proved". Nevertheless, MEYER too attacks in good reason the Crania Ethnica, 

 where the authors state à propos of a skull, boldly called : "Crâne de Negrito-Papou de 

 Bornéo", that this skull proves without doubt the actual existence of Negritoes in the heart 

 of Bornéo. Alas, this "cranial" Negrito has remained up to the présent the only Bornean one! 



It is the more dangerous to draw important conclusions from skulls, as their origin is 

 often very dubious. VlRCHOW [222] stated this frankly for the skulls of his time. Would this 

 hâve changed suddenly since 1873? I think the answer is not difficult to guess. 



After ail, measuring living objects as well as skeletons cannot possibly give a strictly 

 exact nor a complète image of the forms of the human body. It is a useful and even an 

 indispensable method, but it cannot do without the sight of the living man, just as the 

 médical laboratory does not make superfluous the personal examination of a patient. There 

 is something mathematical in anthropometry, that does not harmonize with nature's endless 

 multitude of forms. 



Moieover it is a drawback of a great deal of the body-measures that the individual 

 variability is so large that the différences between the individuals may be larger than those, 

 accepted for the races. Take some hundred men from a European town, and ail statures 

 — also those under 150 cm. — and ail skull-forms may be found. Colour of skin and hair- 



