191 0—1 1. ] The Place in Nature of the Tasmanian Aboriginal. 41 
III. — The Place in Nature of the Tasmanian Aboriginal as deduced 
from a Study of his Calvarium. — Part I. His Relations to 
the Anthropoid Apes, Pithecanthropus, Homo primigenius, 
Homo fossilis, and Homo sapiens. By Richard J. A. Berry, 
M.D., Professor of Anatomy in the University of Melbourne, and 
A. W. D. Robertson, M.D. Melb., Government Research Scholar 
in the Anatomy Department of the University of Melbourne. (With 
Two Folding Tables.) 
(Read March 7, 1910. MS. received March 30, 1910.) 
In our communication to the Royal Society of Victoria of the 11th March, 
1909 (1), describing our recent discovery of forty -two Tasmanian crania 
hitherto quite unknown to the world of science, we stated that “ one of the 
earliest purposes to which it is proposed to utilise the present material is 
the determination of the relationship of the Tasmanian to the anthropoids 
and primitive man on the one hand, and to the Australian aboriginal on 
the other hand. Schwalbe’s study of Pithecanthropus erectus (2) may 
serve as a basis for the former purpose, and Klaatsch’s recent work (3) for 
the latter, though it must be remembered that innumerable authors have 
contributed to both subjects.” The present work is the fulfilment of the 
first part of this undertaking, namely, the determination of the relationship 
of the Tasmanian to the anthropoids and primitive man. 
In view of the fact that the whole object of the present investigation is 
one of comparison, it will be obvious that some previously existing work 
or works on anthropoids and primitive man had to be taken as the basis 
upon which the present research was to be reared ; and in view of the 
distinguished character of the work of Professor G. Schwalbe, the Director 
of the Anatomical Institute of the University of Strassburg, in both of the 
fields mentioned, it need cause no surprise that his investigational methods 
of “ form analysis ” have been selected by us almost exclusively as the basis 
upon which our examination of the Tasmanian aboriginal calvarium has been 
made, whilst, for purposes of comparison, we have availed ourselves not 
only of Schwalbe’s work but also of Klaatsch’s researches. 
We are, of course, aware that Schwalbe’s investigational methods of ex- 
amining the skull roof have not met with universal approval. Cunningham 
(4), for example, says : “ What is the value of this glabello-cerebral index of 
Schwalbe ? Can we rely upon it giving a true and proper idea of the 
