92 
A Studji of the Crania of the Moriori 
More valuable comparative material is that of Bcott*. I have placed in 
parallel columns in Table II those measurements of Dr Scott which in any degree 
correspond with mine. We agree so closely in the main straightforward measure- 
ments, that where a really substantial difference is apparent, I think it must be 
attributable to differences in method of measuring rather than to differences of 
material. I ought to say that I am responsible for the determination of the means 
from Dr Scott's tables of measurements. While the sex ratio in my material is 
roughly as 3 : 2 that of Dr Scott's is 3 : 1, so that he has only about half my number 
of females, although his males are about the same in number as mine. I think it 
probable that we have followed a different appreciation of sex, because, while his 
male measurements are on the whole very close to mine, practically all his absolute 
female measurements are less ; thus, the difference he gets between the sexes is far 
greater than my difference, and rather greater than is usual among uncivilised 
races, where there is a greater tendency to equality in the measurements than 
among civilised races. I would venture with all deference to suggest that possibly 
size has weighed too much with him in sexingf. The first difference between our 
results to be noted is 33 cm.^ in the male capacity, but he used shot and I used 
mustard seed and a difference of this order may well arise with such difference of 
method. It is more or less confirmed by the result for female crania, because 
although his skulls are distinctly less than mine in size, he gets only a difference 
of 19 cm.^ in the capacity. Our F, L, B, B', H and (?) LB I values are in 
good agreement for males; so also are our U, G'H, J, NH, NB, O^L, G^, GL, 
fml, fmb, and all the indices except the orbital index for the same sex. Our 
difference in the orbital index is due to measurement of the breadth OiL, but 
this is preciselv a measurement, which, without absolutely identical method, often 
leads to great divergence. Turning to our differences we first note Q, the 
transverse arc; the considerable difference here is repeated in the females. 
prognathous, and witli the teetli very much ground down — to ha\-e the usual Moriori characteristics. 
Four crania, one a child's, two male and one female, were collected durirvg the Challengtr Expedition. 
Tliey are described and measured in the Challenger Reports, Zoology, Vol. x. p. 73, Report on the 
Human Crania. The two males are clearly fine crania, exceeding our average, the female is below 
average. Three crania are described by Zuckerkandl in the Rdse dcr Novara; Anthropologischer Thcil, 
1 Abth. S. 104; but the few measurements given are of small use for comparative purposes. Finally 
five at Paris are considered by de Quatrefages and Hamy in the Crania Ethnica, p. 401, Paris, 1882. 
The three male crania appear to be very large as compared with our series, giving a mean 
C = 1600 cm.^ ( ! ), U = 548, L = 194, B = 146, H — 137 and J = 142, while the two females have a mean 
C = 1565 cm.3 ( ! ), i!7 = 524, L = 185, B = 144, H = 141, J = 132. 
Either the measurements are not according to our standards or the crania have been selected as 
specially remarkable skulls. 
* loc. cit. on our p. 82. 
f We have included Scott's three doubtful crania with his females, not only because he himself 
in his table puts them in that section, but because, being the rather larger crania of the section, they 
somewhat reduce the differences Ijctween his and our female mean characters. 
J I think it possible that Dr Scott and I have not determined the alveolar point in precisely the 
same manner, and 1 have accordingly bracketed this measurement and the resulting Gnathic Index 
in Table II. . 
