106 PROFESSOR SIR W. TURNER ON 



dolichocephalic, but in the Australians the crania are absolutely longer than in the 

 Dravidians, owing in part to the prominence of the glabella. In the Australians it is 

 not unusual for the adult male to have the glabello-occipital diameter approaching, 

 or even a little more than, 200 mm., whilst in the male Dravidians measured in 

 Tables I.-IY, only two specimens reached 191 mm. The Australian skull is heavier, 

 and the outer table is coarser and rougher than in the Dravidian ; the forehead also is 

 much more receding ; the sagittal region is frequently ridged, and the slope outwards to 

 the parietal eminence is steeper. The Australians in the norma facialis have the 

 glabella and supra-orbital ridges much more projecting ; the nasion more depressed ; the 

 jaws heavier ; the upper jaw usually prognathous, sometimes remarkably so ; the teeth 

 larger and coarser, so as to deserve the name macrodont. The coarser character of the 

 skull, especially in the temporal region, the heavier jaws and the large strong teeth, 

 point to the use of a coarser food by the Australians, for which a more powerful 

 masticatory apparatus is required. On the other hand, both Australian and Dravidian 

 crania have the nasal index platyrhine or mesorhine ; the occurrence of a long, narrow, 

 or leptorhine nose being so exceptional, that its presence indicates that the skull has 

 probably been incorrectly named, or is not of a pure race. In both races also the males 

 have usually a microseme orbit ; but whilst the Australians have customarily a long 

 dolichuranic palato-alveolar arch, in the Dravidians it is broader in relation to the 

 length, and frequently brachyuranic. 



As regards the cranial capacity of the Australians, whilst the range in the thirty- 

 nine male skulls which I have measured was from 1514 c.c. to 1044, the mean was 

 only 1280 c.c, which is somewhat less than the general Dravidian mean 1314 c.c. 

 In the female Australians, twenty-four women ranged from 1240 to 930, and 

 had a mean 11 15*6 c.c, which is also less than the Dravidian mean 1157 obtained 

 from seven female crania. It should be stated that of the series of sixty-three 

 Australian skulls, eight men were less than 1200 c.c, and only four above 1400 

 c.c. ; whilst of the women only three were above 1200 c.c, and ten were below 

 1100 c.c. 



By a careful comparison of Australian and Dravidian crania, there ought not to 

 be much difficulty in distinguishing one from the other. The comparative study of the 

 characters of the two series of crania has not led me to the conclusion that they can be 

 adduced in support of the theory of the unity of the two people. 



The skulls which belonged to the Koydwar, Kamar, Ahir-Goala and Teli castes or 

 tribes were dolichocephalic, platyrhine, and, with one exception, orthognathic, characters 

 which they shared with the Dravidian crania. It is not unlikely that in these castes 

 there is a strong Dravidian element. The Bhima skulls, though dolichocephalic and 

 either orthognathous or mesognathous, were not platyrhine. The Bunjana skull, on the 

 other hand, was hyper-brachycephalic, though the jaw was orthognathous, and the nose 

 was platyrhine. The Lohar skull was mesaticephalic and orthognathic, but the nasal 

 index was leptorhine, and in so far pointed to a predominance of Aryan blood. The 



