REPORT ON THE BONES OF THE HUMAN SKELETON. 
33 
that, if sufficiently reliable data are obtainable, a classification of the pelvis into readily 
recognisable groups would be extremely convenient, and would save much time and 
trouble in description. Craniologists must be for ever grateful to Anders Retzius for 
grouping the skulls of the races of men into the two great divisions of dolichocephalic 
and brachycephalic, whilst the separation from the more extreme forms of these groups 
of an intermediate or mesaticephalic division by Paul Broca has been of material service. 
Owing to the paucity of pelves in our museums as compared with the number of crania 
of the best known races, we are not in a position to speak with so much certainty of the 
characteristic pelvic form as we are of the head form in so many races, but there is now 
I think, sufficient material belonging to a number of races to enable me to offer for the con- 
sideration of anthropologists a classification which may, I trust, be regarded as satisfactory. 
The dimensions which I shall take as presenting, in my judgment, the most reliable 
data for comparison, are the conjugate and transverse diameters of the pelvic brim, and 
the classification will be based on the modifications in the range of the brim index 
— the so-called pelvic index. I shall not, however, as was done by Zaaijer and Martin, 
limit myself to a division into two groups, but shall make three divisions, two of which 
will represent extreme forms in opposite directions, whilst the third will be intermediate. 
I shall express these divisions in terms derived from the Greek, so that the nomenclature 
in pelvic classification may be as far as possible on the same lines as the well-known 
divisions of crania. Neither the ancient Greek nor Roman physicians appear to have 
recognised the pelvis as a chief division of the skeleton, 1 for they associated the sacrum 
and coccyx with the spine, and the innominate bones with the lower limbs. No word, 
therefore, was employed in ancient Greek to designate this part of the skeleton. But 
the term neWa or ttcXXo?, a bowl or pail, may be regarded as equivalent to the Latin 
pelvis. 2 The modern Greeks, however, designate the anatomical pelvis by the word 
\ei<dvn, a dish; 3 if one were therefore to conjoin either with ne\\a. or XeKavrj, the prefix 
SoXtyo?, long, to express one extreme form, 7rXaru9, wide, to express the opposite 
form, and /rea-atraro?, middlemost, to expresss the intermediate condition, one would 
obtain descriptive terms to suit our purpose. By dolicliopellic ( dolicholekanic ) is to be 
understood a pelvis in which the conjugate diameter of the brim is either longer 
than the transverse or approaches closely to it ; by platypellic 4 ( platylekanic ), a pelvis 
in which the transverse diameter of the brim greatly exceeds the conjugate ; by 
mesatipellic ( mesatilekanic ) a pelvis in which the transverse diameter is not so greatly 
in excess of the conjugate. It may not be possible in the present state of our know- 
1 Onomatologia anatomica, von Professor Joseph Hyrtl. Wien, 1880. 
2 Liddell and Scott’s Greek English Lexicon. Kilian in his essay entitled “ Das Stachelbecken (Schilderung neuer 
Beckenform, Mannheim, 1854) employs the term nthts in combination with ctx.ui/6ivoi, akantlio-pelys, pelvis spinosa, to 
express a pelvis with a sharp pectineal line or a process projecting from it. 
3 ANQPnilOAOriA, rai r.AIAMANTOIIOTAOT tv 2MTPNH. 1880, p. 36. 
4 I have not used the word “ brachypellic ” (“ brachylekanic ”| as I wished to bring out by the employment of the 
prefix 7 rXar i; that relatively great width was the characteristic feature of this form of pelvic brim. 
(ZOOL. CHALL. EXP. PART XLVII. 1886.) 
Aaa 5 
