REPORT ON THE HUMAN CRANIA. 
101 
shortest of the Fijian skulls (two females) it is 182, whilst six specimens (all males) are 190 
or upwards. In their greatest transverse diameters the two series of skulls much more 
closely approximate, for whilst the average of the twelve Admiralty Islanders is 128 mm., 
that of the eleven Fijians is 126. The Fijian skulls are therefore not only relatively but 
absolutely considerably longer than the Admiralty Islanders. The crania also exhibit 
differences in the altitudinal or vertical index, for whilst the average height of the 
Admiralty Islanders is 131 mm., that of the Fijians is 140. In consequence, therefore, of 
this predominance in length and height, the Fijian skulls possess a considerably greater 
cubic capacity, the average of which in the males is 1504 c.c., in the female 1327 c.c., so 
that their female average is somewhat higher than that of the males and females collect- 
ively in the Admiralty Island series. 
All the Fijian skulls are strongly phsenozygous. In the Admiralty Islanders, not- 
withstanding the broken zygomatic arches in several specimens, the skulls are as a rule 
manifestly cryptozygous. In the degree of prognathism the two series of crania closely 
correspond, for the average gnathic index in the Admiralty Islanders is 103, and 
that of the Fijians is 103 ‘7. A marked difference, however, is to be seen in the relations 
of the length and breadth of the nasal aperture, for whilst the breadth is more than half 
the height in the Fijians, in whom the average nasal index is 5 6 '6, and all the specimens, 
with one exception, belonged to the platyrhine group, only four of the Admiralty 
Islanders are platyrhine, six are leptorhine, and the general average is on the line 
between the leptorhine and mesorhine groups. The mean orbital index in the Admiralty 
Islanders is about the middle of the mesoseme series, and alike in the two sexes ; whilst 
in the Fijians it show r s a marked difference in the males and females. For in the males 
it is on the average 84‘2, or barely within the mesoseme series, whilst in the females it 
is 907, or distinctly megaseme. In the form of the palato-maxillary region the two 
series of skulls are much alike, for the mean palato-maxillary index in the Admiralty 
Islanders is 112, and in the Fijians it is 111, so that they are both mesuranic. 
In conclusion, whilst both series are markedly dolichocephalic, the latitudinal index 
is much lower, the altitudinal index is much higher, and the cranial capacity is greater 
in the Fijians than in the Admiralty Islanders ; the Fijians are phsenozygous, platyrhine, 
mesoseme in the males and megaseme in the females ; the Admiralty Islanders are, as a rule, 
cryptozygous, lepto-mesorhine, and mesoseme. The two series of crania, however, closely 
correspond in the degree of prognathism and in the form of the palato-maxillary region. 
The question therefore arises, are the people with hypsistenocephalic crania to be 
regarded as a different race from the other dolichocephalic people inhabiting the 
Melanesian region ? Dr. Barnard Davis is evidently inclined to the opinion that they are 
a different race, but this opinion is not shared by ethnologists generally. Neither does 
the evidence which has been advanced in its support seem to me to be conclusive. For, 
as Dr. Davis himself admits, crania in which hypsistenocephalism exists do not all exhibit 
