R Crewdson Benington 
135 
XXVII, XXVIII and XXIX giving the English 17th century head in solid, we 
find an extraordinary agreement in the sagittal and horizontal contours. The 
nasions and gammas are almost coincident, the lambdas and bregmas hardly 2 mm. 
apart; the deviations in either series are not beyond what we have found for pro- 
bable errors, and distinctly less than those between the three series of Congo 
crania. The maximum divergence appears when the transverse vertical sections 
are superposed; the Guanche falls inside the English at all points by amounts 
varying from 0'5 to 3 - 5 mm.; the concavity to right and left of the vertex and 
the contraction at No. 2 of the breadth above the auricular passages being the 
most important differences. But even here the differences are not greater than 
the reader will find by superposing the transverse section Fig. XIII on Fig. XVI, 
i.e. are local rather than racial differences, while the differences of the sagittal and 
horizontal sections of English and Guanche are far less. I think we may safely 
conclude that the divergences between the English and Guanche cranial contour 
types are not as great as we find between two local races of Congo negroes. 
(c) English and Eskimo Cranial Types. To test how far we are dealing with 
slight differences peculiar to our method of averaging, let us place Figs. XXVII, 
XXVIII and XXIX in tissue upon Figs. XXI, XXII and XXIII. We mark 
essential differences at once ; in the sagittal section the Eskimo encloses entirely 
the English skull with 3 to 9 mm. to spare. In the horizontal section, the English 
skull, if 2 mm. shorter, has in its broadest part some 4 mm. to spare on both sides. 
In the transverse vertical section the Eskimo shows excess at the vertex and 
considerable defect just below, in the region of ordinates Nos. 8 and 9; but its 
bi-auricular breadth is again greater. The deviations throughout are quite signi- 
ficant and markedly in excess of the Guanche-English differences. 
(d) English, Negro and Egyptian Cranial Types. It will not be without 
interest to compare these types by superposing Figs. XVIII, XIX and XX in 
tissue upon Figs. XXVII, XXVIII and XXIX, and, say, Figs. XV, XVI and XVII. 
Taking first the sagittal sections there is extraordinary agreement between English 
and Egyptian, if the nasions are superposed, not only as far as the bregma but 
right up to the region of ordinate No. 9. Then the Egyptian shows defect of 
occipital development, with the same tendency but less marked than in the negro, 
to verticality in the neighbourhood of <y. If now we superpose XVIII on XV, 
we find that the Egyptian differs far more from the Negro, than from the English 
type. It is now the Negro who is more vertical at the gamma, and who shows 
occipital deficiency. Nor is it possible to say that the Egyptian is nearer in 
sagittal contour to the Negro, because the Egyptian and English agree in differing 
by absolutely the same amount from Negro from nasion to within one centimetre 
of the lambda. From these onwards the Egyptian deviates towards the Negro but 
is always closer to the English. The reader will see these points excellently by 
placing Figs. XVIII and XXVII in tissue both together upon Fig. XV. 
Turning now to the transverse sections, we may superpose XXVIII and XIX 
in tissue at the same time on XVI. The Egyptian is throughout smaller than 
