C. D. Fawcett 
431 
Ranke admits* the difficulty as to the i^osition of the callipers point on the 
nasal side and draws : "eine Verbindungslinie zwischen den stets deutlichea inneren 
Auslaufern des oberen und unteren Augenhohlenrandes." He further states that 
"iiber den wahren Verlauf dieser Verbindungslinie kann ein ernsthafter Zweifel 
niemals bestehen." Unfortunately with the experience of the Naqada skulls 
before us, we cannot fully agree in this opinion. Is the " Verbindungslinie " to be 
a geodesic between the last sensible points of the upper and lower orbital rims, 
or is it to be a curve on the nasal wall following the general curvature indicated by 
the sweep of the orbital rims ? The difference in the breadth of the orbit with 
one or other of these interpretations will frequently amount to several milli- 
metres. Ranke probably had one or other of these ideas clearly in his mind — he 
does not say which — and so passed over the other. Intermediate stages between 
the two are possible and thus the personal equation again looms largely in the 
background. In our measurements an attempt was made to follow the curvature 
of the rim, and not to form a geodesic. The result is that the breadth of the 
Naqada orbit comes out larger and the orbital index less than those of the 
Thebans or Copts which wei'e measured probably by Schmidt's convention. 
Dr W. R. Macdonell kindly measured 40 orbits and 30 $ orbits for 
the Naqadas by what we may term the 'geodesic' method for comparison with 
those obtained by the ' curvature ' method. The results show : first, that the 
difference is in both sexes greater for the left than for the right eye ; secondly, it 
averaged about 1'9 mm. for male and 1'6 mm. for female eyes. Taking the 
average of both orbits, this would reduce our measui ements as follows : — 
Maximum Breadth of Naqada Orbit Oj. 
^ 40-8 mm. % 39-9 mm. 
These are practically identical with the values given by Koganei for the Aino, 
but still differ sensibly from the values for the Thebans and Copts. There is no 
doubt, however, that these were measured from the " lacrymal point." Maciver 
does not tell us how^ he measured the breadth of his orbits, but just as our 
measurements for the height of the Naqada orbit agree perfectly with his, and 
with those for Thebans and Copts, his for the breadth are also in perfect agreement 
with those for Thebans and Copts. We think we may therefore conclude that so 
far from there existing any sensible distinction between the shape or size of the 
orbit between prehistoric and historic Egyptians, there really is absolute identity 
if the orbit be measured in the same manner. 
We are now in a better position to look through Table V. and compare our 
allied races. We turn first to the Naqada of 6000 B.C., the Thebans of 1500 B.C. 
and the Copts of to-day, three races dividing an interval of about 7000 to 8000 
years into two periods of 3000 to 4000 years. It is impossible not to be impressed 
at once with the striking likenesses between these three groups, especially when 
we notice how small are the number of skulls upon which occasionally (as for 
* Beitrage zur physischen Anthropologie der Bayern, Bd. i. Die Bildung der Augenhohlen, S. 94. 
