REPORT ON THE BONES OF THE HUMAN SKELETON. 
5 
FiLATOFF, A., Die weibliche Beckeii russisclier Volkstamme, Moscoav, 1877, referred to in Schmidt's Jahrbiich., 
1878, S. 210, Bd. clxxviii. Abstract by C. Hennig. 
Bboca, Paul, Squelettes de deux Hindous noirs des environs de Madras, Bulletin de la Soc. d'Anthrop. de 
Paris, t. 1, ser. 3, p. 47, 1878. 
Meyer, A. B., and E. Tungel, Verzeichniss der Race-skelete und Schadel des Dresdner Anthropologischen 
Museums, Mittheil. aus dem 7c. zoologischen Museum zu Dresden, 1878. 
Maurel, Sur un Bassin de femme Coolie. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. de Paris, 1879. 
Flower, W. H., Osteology and Affinities of the Natives of the Andaman Islands, Joiirn. of the Anthrop. 
Institute, November 1879. Additional Observations, Ibid., November 1884. 
ScHVENCK, A. v., Untersuch. iiber das Becken der Esten, Studien iiher Schwangerschaft, &c., Dorpat, 1880. 
Garson, J. G., Pelvimetry, Trans. International Medical Congress, vol. i. p. 185, 1881; and /owra. Anat. and 
Phys., October 1881. On the osteological characters of the Kubus of Sumatra, Journ. Anthrop. Inst., 
vol. xiv. p. 128, 1885. On the inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego, Journ. Anthrop. In^st., vol. xv., 1885. 
CoRVE, A., La mere et I'enfant dans les races humaines, Paris, 1882. 
RoHLFS, H., Deutsches Archiv fiir Geschichte der Medicin, v., 1882. 
Prochownick, L., Ueber Beckenneigung, Archiv f. Gyndlcol., Bd. xix. Heft. i. ; and Mittheil. iiber Anthropol. 
Beckenmessung, Cor. Blatt. deutsch. Ges. fiir Anthrop., June 1881. 
Ploss, H., Zur Verstandigung iiber ein gemeinsames Verfahren zur Beckenmessung, Archiv fiir Anthrop., 
Heft. iii. Bd. xv. S. 259, 1884. 
Turner, W., The Index of the Pelvic Brim as a Basis of Classification, Journ. of Anat. and Phys., October 1885. 
The Sacral Index in various Races of Mankind, Proc. Boy. Soc. Edin., December 7, 1885; and Journ. of 
Anat. and Phys., January 1886. 
The numerous tables of pelvic measurements which have been published by various 
writers on this part of the skeleton, show a certain want of uniformity in the measures 
adopted. There is indeed a general accordance of opinion on the necessity of taking the 
greatest height and the greatest transverse breadth of the entire pelvis, of measuring the 
antero-posterior and the transverse diameters of both the brim and the outlet of the true 
pelvis, and of determining the length and breadth of the sacrum. But as regards other 
dimensions much diversity of practice exists, for a greater importance has been 
attached to the estimation of the distance between certain points by some writers than 
by others. 
M. Verneau^ has employed no fewer that fifty measurements in his comparative study 
of the human pelvis, and has in addition estimated the relation between the greatest 
antero-posterior and transverse diameters, the height and the greatest transverse diameter, 
and the conjugate and transverse diameters of the brim. On the other hand, 
Gustaf Fritsch ^ and J. G. Garson ^ in their respective memoirs have not considered it 
necessary to take more than fourteen measurements, from which various indices have 
been deduced. It seems to me that several of those employed by Verneau are unnecessary, 
and throw but little light on those characters which are to be regarded as of primary 
or even secondary importance in the study of the pelvis in the different races of men. 
The dimensions taken by G. Fritsch and by Garson, again, although these observers do 
1 Le Bassin dans les Sexes et dans les Races, 1875. ^ Dig Eingeborenen Siid-Afrikas. 
* Pelvimetry in Journ. Anat. and Phys., October 1881. 
